The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPACKET Utilities Committee 2008-01-17F:LE AGENDA TOWN OF ESTES PARK UTILITIES COMMITTEE 8:00 a.m. Thursday, January 17, 2008 Preparation date: January 8,2008 ACTION ITEMS PUBLIC COMMENT Light and Power Department No action items Water Department No action items IT Department No action items REPORTS: Light and Power 1. Light and Power Financial Reports 2. Regulatory Updates 3. Light and Power Loan Update 4. Substation update Water 1. Water Financial Reports 2. Membrane Procurement Update 3. Drinking Water Pre-Loan Planning and Design Assistance Grant Acceptance JI No reports Note: The Utilities Committee reserves the right to consider other items not available at the time the agenda was prepared. i 4 Laserjet 3015 W. HP LASERJET FAX invent Jan-14-2008 12:27PM Fax Call Report Job Date Time Type Identification Duration Pages Result 343 1/14/2008 12:24:32PM Send 5869561 0:32 1 OK 344 1/14/2008 12:25:09PM Send 5869532 0:31 1 OK 345 1/14/2008 12:25:45PM Send 5861691 0:34 1 OK 346 1/14/2008 12:26:25PM Send 6353677 0:32 1 OK 347 1/14/2008 12:27:02PM Send 5771590 0:39 1 OK U I ELECTRIC SALES BY MONTH ($1,000) 1,200 1,100- - I 1,000 - 5 - U.1 + 4 900 -=4 - -- F - ft i:- - - 02005 ~ 800 -t? , - 0 2 N 02006 - 5,1 4. 2 700 -11 <4 --_ 4 --- J'. 1 -C & 1~ 3 '3 1 1 1'' ' a t 02007 0 4 4 : cr 1 .. ; .1 22; ;Cl -.1 14>& 4.g . .0 *t; 14 1 1. 4 6 2 - ... 4 .Xâ‚¬ I Â£ .V Â·Â·>.4 , 1.- I :2 .4 1. 9 + 600 - - __ 4 4 -/ 41* -' -f :Â·~ _- 4 +~ - w >2 , . S =a 1 4 7 4 Â· 5~* ,â€¢s },i 'tr: ty ; Â¢ 5 1 I ! 1 >9 4 ... 4. I. < .4 : 3 . I 1 I. 4. 6 ./ 6 %: Hil 4 j as. \1 4% tr f 1 911 :i * 1 1,4 4 1 ';1: 3 5 '494 4 ; i I ..1 2' , .9 4 ./ I- t 4 4. Â¢ 4 300 - '4 1 42 1 2 , '1 ' :' i ' 4 i b 51 i f. , 41 , .4 2 , ef , Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec YEAR TO DATE ELECTRIC SALES ($1,000) 12,000 3.92% 2007 YTD VS 2006 10,303,317~ 10,000 - - . CZZ] 2005 8,000 -- - - - [ZED 2006 6,000-- 0 2007 /1 - Budget -r 311 A .: fi f> Â·01 'C tÂ· 'f :1 4,000 -2 -'0 - I.' -'lb -'... -/.,1:1 -'.4 -'.i I 2,000 - Â«1 - il -1 E -~i -11 -~:A -3i - 1 - $2 ,/0 41/2 4 9 rl,1 1 11. x .4 5: 4 0 '~' .i 0,131111, 14.4 :<-1 :-1 1" :1 5: 'E; 51 . 4 $ 4% Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec R L&P 8 YEAR TO DATE SALES 11 ..1./:111.1 YTD ENERGY PURCHASES 140,000 120,000 - 100,000 - 1.35% YTD 2007 VS 2006 80,000 O 2006 60,000 12007 40,000 20-000 ,. ~-~~~- - - - -~ ~~ 12005 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec YTD POWER COST vs. BUDGET ($1,000) B BUDGET Â¤ACTUAL 5,000 4,500 4,000 r 3,500 := - Â·0: 0 3,000 m -* -5 2,500 FF--U _44 -I 7- mil 3% 4 2,000 - - fr_4 -4 -4 -0 -4 42 M-- 11&0%%,m 1,500 - ~ -N 1 -%1 -* 4* -0% -8*< - Al && 1,000 - Am'Mi@*A 1%1 1 F _ 1811 >.2 ., , 4._ BL 381 .85 - *- Â£% 3. _ Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec R L&P 7 &***rp 1% . MONTHLY PEAK DEMAND 25500 23500 21500 -0- 2005 ---2006 19500 Â«Â» 2007 17500 - 15500 13500 - - 11500 - Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec MONTHLY ENERGY PURCHASES 14,000 - - . 12,000--3# 0% - 74 , /2 tr--_,_i--1 -_-0/ %4 37- XS 10,000 -~ -#St -~f 4 /.03 04 02 7 44 A %2 4 y- 3 - 9 - 0% A B 30 04 02005 #844# 01 01-B #% 61 2, 8,000 -04 -4. -/ -~ --#1 -fi -#t --0 -0 -31 - m2OO6 42 0/ #i 04 44 %3 02007 8Â¢ f:-m iR I~ 4 1-: O 'A#40% 04<Ati i N $: 01 2 34 4.4 32 38* 4 01 36 34 6,000 --#2 / '2c '- -49 #r& S< -4* -04 -4-3 -4 -43 - 4,000 --0 -i -%1 -fi: -54 -33 -P -p -#1 -'91 -A -0{ - 42%48 % 05 0% 0% Wit 4% 2,000 - 4% i â‚¬ * h ~ 43 0 41 , %3 , 3% i.%1 8 ' 0* Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec R L&P 6 SYSTEM KW 0#Ze i &204 2%23â‚¬52 2 2 -- 2 6: 3 R.mic zg litic C, - 9 -1 00 (-1 5; 2 g g -- % ro Ch 422Â° 1 CO- r r- A m.gal -- Â§% AZÂ©282 000000 60 000Â©00 322 5252&2 t-â‚¬94~;CNOM -00Â©W dod g@ 0 gg =11 091 MeÂ©c, O =* 3 4 464 3 2/6 2%Â§Â© 00.tte MAX *%46 El U 2Â§ Rti 3{3590 0 0, 9=2 M. 4-9 00-1-t-Â©rn GO "1- en el 1-1 /1 1. 0% 1 el - O CL EEB 5 isi Z - E 0 t c,tr, C. g E E 22 - 5,6 0 2 i : CU<O 1 - 3 - bo N g * 2 8 %EZ [ Â£Â£07LE 0*6'00Â£ Â£000 200.0 (ft'L'89) Â£Â£0'ILE 061'ZOE (folu) E60'OL (010'0 00!Alos lq@a MONTH TO DATE YEAR TO DATE BUDGET vs. YTD %Â£8 SLL'*36'6 EtL'68Â£' I I 6L0'0 8Â£00 (6 1 â‚¬'890 Â§LL'*E6'6 95Â¢999'6 (9â‚¬6'*St) ED'Ze['I Let'L26 sam,!pued,Â£3 18}01 Beginning unrestricted (usable) fund balance 5,171,574 3,195,309 $3,195,309 $3,195,309 9,973,692 10,364,892 391,200 0.083 10,208,57 10,364,892 Ltâ‚¬'5Â£9 LEI'8ZE'I 900.0 500.0 (Z9L'II) Ltt5Â£9 58*'Ca (I) *CE'fL EEC'gL 9Â£L'8Z6 (05 1 't+9) (05Â£*EL) 9â‚¬L'SE6 980'ZOO' i (t98'699) (681'69t) â‚¬L9'ooc (18'!de< atopq sainlipuodxa Â£08'05 V/N LOR'ozf LOB'OES (EES'Lf) (Â£29'Lf) 0 soolnes 10410 m pmeoolle/POA!00@1 qse) Total O&M Expenses 774,60 1,155,906 (381,303) 7,779,04 7,929,765 (150,716) 8,786,013 7,929,765 101 OEL'886 Z99'*L6 8000 800.0 (860'LO OEL'886 Eâ‚¬9' I 56 (825) 661'18 [L9'08 ,no s.jolsuan Butle.,ado Â£179'6#'1 (091Â»9) Lgt'Lft â‚¬49'6*4' I 980'ZOO' [ (96â‚¬'LEL) (ZZL'925) EL9'OOE I[,Uoul Jol uouisod tise, u! ONumo 658'te'ts 65I'I95'ES EggÂ»9'ts 298'#9'DS aounieq pury (9|qusn) poio!Â·Usalun 01!!Puzl Total Revenues 10,658,542 10 53,511 194,969 10,745,592 10,85 VAR Per kWh Per kWh Budget Source of Supply ,471) 619,186 4,657,040 4,785,000 4 2007 2006 2007 88.619 (196,231) illing and Accounts 630,142 (50,187) 1,231,879 (127,360) stribution and Maintenance 5,389 1,410,704 **DRAFT** CASH FLOW COMPARISON Operation and Maintenance Expense LIGHT AND POWER FUND 10AO SenUOA@.130 LAmpyop/ss@OxED le)O*Ins Expenditures '1 . |61Â£'951$ | :1@punpgAo pmoofoid ELÂ¢80E'01$ :*Spnq Z68't,9{701$ :ooed Â§!41 le sanUOAN lenutle %001 1*L'Â£98$ :Ae rl'01 V/N V/N V/N %00 I %0 Iti %0*0 9Â£L E )Allells!~1111'PV - dNWH 10/AIG# iO/AIa# 10/Ala# %001 %0 0$ 10/AICI# 0 0 Rea,Jo @Uill sati 1 V/N V/N V/N %001 %0 ItE$ %0.0 0 g| Bu,illS,1 galÂ¥ loopinO 00'0$ 0 1500$ %00 1 %0 Â£28$ %8 1 5<Ell i #aJO out!1-[1111110~--ISD goÂ·tz6$ 8ZE' I L IL00$ %001 %0 EEC I $ %30- Â£9LL1 El COL AN,@ua - lututoj - SSD V/N V/N V/N %66 960 Â£*01$ %00 0 011 .Mod pu!/A 09 8 11$ SLE'l 5680.0$ %001 %0 01-E.2$ %1.1 62'<E OE ABiall3 0!sea Soli 1 L9'Rt't'$ 166'6 9510*0$ %66 %0 Â£69'2$ %90- Â»6'65 9 UltupÂ¥ @21~-1 - dNWH Â£61+1$ {9Â£'. 8140.0$ %66 %0 '11'fs %ZO- 235'101 l E uiuipy limuS- dNWH Eflus 110'f E090'0$ %66 %, EL'61$ %8.1- CLO'9*Z D) tedto'unIN 89.501$ EZ9'I EL90-0$ %96 %Â£ OLO'9Z$ %Â£0- 2*9'00* Lt: kea Jo out!1 / ASJOUEI soM 1 MFOL I $ 918,1 *L60'0$ %Â£6 %L 61 09$ VIE. 1- fzz'989 9LE puetuaa le'lu@Pis@M J Et'WER-1$ Ezo'0[ 41900$ %98 LOE SEE'ELI $ %LO LRO'f 18'E *6 08197 Al@S ue{) 90611$ EOE' 1 L !60-0$ %99 %Et 191'56/$ %0' 1- 9207Â£1'Z fl~9. I I[BUIS AJOS UOD SL 6*$ 6Zy Ft'60'0$ %Â£17 %Et' EtÂ¢17Â£Â£$ %0.0 856'986'â‚¬ 1 G'L 1~!tuPPLOW 1 linj/Aoll tsno/H/AN H?AN/Ae.H wno % Aoll [8101. sanuaa@11 4Â»19 HADI 433830 # SAY SAÂ¥ SAV JO % 18)01 % 18101 0081@Ae BU1AOUI tpUOUI - 21 LO-mqulama mea Kieutums odil SONERil ME[MOd aNV 1HDIEI XHVd SELLSEI :IO NMO.I. .4 . 1 a. <C < 9001 - ZOOZ- , - %000 080 AON loO des n W ed uer Actual L&P revenues over/beyond Budget 3.00% - -, 1-. --I---I......,- *.'...,---.-----* - .~. ---.---- -1.--- - -â€ž -~. - -- - ---G 2.00% 1.00% %00. P %00.Z- - %00.Â£- -ln i >re <b L&P Revenue Progress - 0 Budgeted Revenues luennO le senueAey â€¢ - 000'006'6$ $10,500,000 - 000'0017'0 Lt $10,300,000 - $10,200,000 --- - - - $10,100,000 -- $10,000,000 - $9,800,000 ----- -- 000'00Z'6$ -- 000'009'6$ - 000'009'6$ TOWN of ESTES PARK Utilities Department ESTES PARK INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM COLORADO DATE: January 10, 2008 TO: Utilities Committee FROM: Bob Goehring and Mike Mangelsen SUBJECT: Regulatory Updates Background Dave Lock is a full-time Platte River Power Authority (PRPA) employee who devotes half of his time to Colorado Association of Municipal Utilities (CAMU). Lock has responsibility for PRPA's federal and state legislative and regulatory affairs, lobbying on issues agreed upon by CAMU and PRPA. Lock has provided us with information on proposed regulatory updates that would impact our utility. These proposed regulatory updates include the following: 1. Net Metering 2. Energy Efficiency 3. Governors Energy Office 1. NET METERING State legislators, lobbyists, citizen advocates, environmentalists and public officials are in the process of drafting a renewable energy bill that will satisfy all interested parties. The Light and Power Department had planned on and was close to implementing our own on-site renewable energy / net metering tariff when we were notified of this pending legislation. If passed, the proposed tariff may or may not qualify and meet all the requirements of the bill. As a result, we have put the tariff on hold pending a decision by the lawmakers. Following are some of the elements of the new proposal that are being debated: 1. It would amend the state Renewable Portfolio Standard 2. It would require municipalities with 5,000 or more customers to establish a net metering program 3. It would require that projects up to 25 kW would have to be considered 4. It would allow municipalities to reimburse customers in a manner they deem appropriate for excess customer generation 5. It would prohibit charging "standby fees, " lost revenue charges," or "supplemental charges" not charged to non-solar customers. 6. It would require municipalities that turned down a project to "provide a technical and or economic explanation" to the customer 7. It would require utilities to adopt and post small interconnection standards functionally similar to those adopted by the PUC 2. ENERGY EFFICIENCY See attachment: 2b. - House bill 3. GOVERNOR'S ENERGY OFFICE See attachments: 2c. - Governor's Energy Office Process 2cl. - Net Meter Rebate Proposed Funding Budget There is no cost associated with this memorandum Action steps requested There is no action step requested with this memorandum 2. . Good afternoon: Attached please find the final draft of a bill that will be introduced by Rep. Claire Levy, D- Boulder, that would require munis and co-ops with more than 5,000 customers to spend 2% of their gross annual revenues on energy efficiency projects. I responded to Rep. Levy that I would share this with you and let her know where CAMU could be with this proposal. Please let me know your feedback. Also, we will have a chance to discuss this on the Legislative Committee Conference call Friday, Jan. 18~h, at 9 a,m. I will send an agenda and call-in information early next week for the call. In the meantime, please don't hesitate to contact me. Dave Lock Colorado Association of Municipal Utilities 2b Second Regular Session Sixty-sixth General Assembly STATE OF COLORADO BILLPAPER LLS NO. 08-0591.01 Duane Gall HOUSE BILL HOUSE SPONSORSHIP Levy, SENATE SPONSORSHIP (None), House Committees Senate Committees A BILL FOR AN ACT 101 CONCERNING MEASURES TO PROMOTE ENERGY EFFICIENCY BY RETAIL 102 ELECTRIC UTILITIES IN WHICH ULTIMATE MANAGERIAL 103 CONTROL IS VESTED IN CUSTOMERS OF SUCH UTILITIES. Bill Summary (Note: This summary applies to this bill as introduced and does not necessarily reflect any amendments that may be subsequently adopted.) Directs cooperative electric associations and municipal utilities serving 5,000 or more customers to engage in conservation and energy efficiency programs and to devote funding equal to 1 % o f sales revenue in their first year, and 2% in their second and subsequent years, to such efforts. Exempts a utility from the spending requirement in any year in which the utility's retail electricity sales, in megawatt-hours, fall at least Shading denotes HOUSE amendment. Double underlining denotes SENATE amendment. - Capital letters indicate new material to be added to existing statute. Dashes through the words indicate deletions from existing statute, 2b , 3% below its sales for the immediately preceding year. Requires periodic reports from the utilities to the governor's energy office. Specifies that this act does not extend PUC authority. Makes conforming amendments. 1 Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Colorado: 2 SECTION 1. Title 40, Colorado Revised Statutes, is amended BY 3 THE ADDITION OF A NEW ARTICLE to read: 4 ARTICLE 3.3 5 Energy Efficiency Programs of 6 Cooperatives and Municipal Utilities 7 40-3.3-101. Legislative declaration. (1) THE GENERAL 8 ASSEMBLY HEREBY FINDS, DETERMINES, AND DECLARES THAT ALL 9 UTILITIES OPERATING IN COLORADO SHOULD IMPLEMENT PROGRAMS TO 10 HELP THEIR. CUSTOMERS INCREASE ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVE 11 ENERGY, THEREBY REDUCING UTILITY BILLS, POLLUTANT EMISSIONS 12 CAUSED BY ELECTRICITY GENERATION AND SUPPLY, ANDCONSUMPTION OF 13 FINITE FOSSIL FUELS. SUCH PROGRAMS ARE MATTERS OF STATEWIDE 14 CONCERN AND ARE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST. 15 (2) THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY FURTHER FINDS, DETERMINES, AND 16 DECLARES THAT, TO THE EXTENT THAT THIS ARTICLE GOVERNS CERTAIN 17 ACTIVITIES OF MUNICIPALLY OWNED UTILITIES AND REQUIRES THEIR 18 PERFORMANCE OF SPECIFIED ACTS, THIS ARTICLE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE 19 NOR AUTHORIZE REGULATION OF THE "FACILITIES, SERVICE AND RATES 20 AND CHARGES THEREFOR" OF MUNICIPALLY OWNED UTILITIES WITHIN THE 21 MEANING OF ARTICLE XXV OF THE STATE CONSTITUTION. 22 40-3.3-102. Definitions. As USED IN THIS ARTICLE, UNLESS THE 23 CONTEXT OTHERWISE REQUIRES: -2- 2b 1 (1) "BENEFIT-COST TEST" MEANS AN OBJECTIVE METHOD OF 2 CALCULATING THE RATIO OF THE TOTAL BENEFITS OF AN ENERGY 3 EFFICIENCY PROGRAM TO ITS TOTAL COSTS. THE BENEFITS INCLUDE A 4 UTILITY'S AVOIDED GENERATION COSTS, AVOIDED POWER PURCHASE 5 COSTS, AVOIDED TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION COSTS, AND AVOIDED 6 FUEL AND OPERATING COSTS. THE COSTS INCLUDE THE UTILITY'S COSTS 7 FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAM DELIVERY, ADMINISTRATION, 8 MARKETING, EVALUATION, AND FINANCIAL INCENTIVES PAID TO 9 PARTICIPANTS. 10 (2) "COST-EFFECTIVE", WITH REFERENCE TO AN ENERGY 11 EFFICIENCY PROGRAM, MEANS HAVING A BENEFIT-COST RATIO GREATER 12 THAN ONE USING THE BENEFIT-COST TEST DEFINED IN SUBSECTION (1) OF 13 THIS SECTION. 14 (3) "ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAM" MEANS A COHERENT SET OF 15 ACTIVITIES UNDERTAKEN BY A UTILITY FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSERVING 16 ELECTRICITY OR INCREASING THE EFFICIENCY OF ELECTRICITY USE BY 17 CUSTOMERS OF THE UTILITY. AN ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAM MAY 18 INCLUDE, BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO, EDUCATION, TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE, 19 AND FINANCIAL INCENTIVES FOR CUSTOMERS. 20 (4) "UTILITY" MEANS A COOPERATIVE ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION OR 21 MUNICIPALLY OWNED UTILITY THAT PROVIDES RETAIL ELECTRIC SERVICE. 22 40-3.3-103. Scope of article - jurisdiction of commission. 23 (1) NOTWITHSTANDING ANY PROVISION OF LAW TO THE CONTRARY, THIS 24 ARTICLE APPLIES TO ALL COOPERATIVE ELECTRIC ASSOCIATIONS AND 25 MUNICIPALLY OWNED UTILITIES THAT, AS OF JULY 1, 2008, OR JANUARY 26 1 OF ANY YEAR AFTER 2008, PROVIDE RETAIL ELECTRIC SERVICE TO FIVE 27 THOUSAND OR MORE CUSTOMERS. THE NUMBER OF CUSTOMERS SERVED -3- 2b 1 BY A UTILITY SHALL BE PRESUMED TO BE NO FEWER THAN THE NUMBER OF 2 UTILITY METERS THAT THE UTILITY EMPLOYS FOR BILLING PURPOSES. 3 (2) NOTHING IN THIS ARTICLE SHALL BE CONSTRUED TO EXPAND 4 THE COMMISSION'S AUTHORITY WITH RESPECT TO ANY UTILITY SUBJECT TO 5 THIS ARTICLE OR ANY NONREGULATED UTILITY BUSINESSES ORAFFILIATES 6 OF A UTILITY. 7 40-3.3-104. Energy efficiency programs - rules - requirements. 8 (1) EXCEPTAS OTHERWISE PROVIDED IN SUBSECTION(6) OF THIS SECTION: 9 (a) EACH UTILITY THAT PROVIDES OR PROVIDED RETAIL ELECTRIC 10 SERVICE TO FIVE THOUSAND OR MORE CUSTOMERS AS OF JULY 1, 2008, 11 SHALL SPEND: 12 (I) DURING CALENDAR YEAR 2009, AN AMOUNT EQUIVALENT TO 13 ATI,EAST ONE PERCENT OFITSRETAILSALES REVENUE ONCOST-EFFECTIVE 14 ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAMS FOR ITS CUSTOMERS; AND 15 (II) DURING CALENDAR YEAR 2010 AND EACH CALENDAR YEAR 16 THEREAFTER, AN AMOUNT EQUIVALENT TO AT LEAST TWO PERCENT OF ITS 17 RETAIL SALES REVENUE ON COST-EFFECTIVE ENERGY EFFICIENCY 18 PROGRAMS FOR ITS CUSTOMERS. 19 (b) EACH UTILITY THAT PROVIDES ORPROVIDED RETAIL ELECTRIC 20 SERVICE TO FIVE THOUSAND OR MORE CUSTOMERS AS OF JANUARY 1, 21 2009, OR OF ANY YEAR THEREAFTER, SHALL SPEND: 22 (I) DURING THE CALENDAR YEAR IN WHICH IT FIRST BECOMES 23 SUBJECT TO THIS ARTICLE, AN AMOUNT EQUIVALENT TO AT LEAST ONE 24 PERCENT OF ITS RETAIL SALES REVENUE ON COST-EFFECTIVE ENERGY 25 EFFICIENCY PROGRAMS FOR ITS CUSTOMERS; AND 26 (II) DURING THE NEXT SUCCEEDING CALENDAR YEAR AND EVERY 27 CALENDAR YEAR THEREAFTER, AN AMOUNT EQUIVALENT TO AT LEAST -4- 2b 1 TWO PERCENT OF ITS RETAIL SALES REVENUE ON COST-EFFECTIVE ENERGY 2 EFFICIENCY PROGRAMS FOR ITS CUSTOMERS. 3 (2) FOR THE PURPOSE OF DETERMINING WHETHER A UTILITY HAS 4 MET ITS MINIMUM ENERGY EFFICIENCY SPENDING REQUIREMENT UNDER 5 THIS SECTION, ALLOWED COSTS SHALL INCLUDE PROGRAM PLANNING, 6 ADMINISTRATION, MARKETING, TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE, CONSUMER 7 EDUCATION, REBATES AND OTHER FINANCIAL INCENTIVES FOR 8 CUSTOMERS, AND EVALUATION COSTS RELATED TO ENERGY EFFICIENCY 9 PROGRAM DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION. 10 (3) EACH UTILITY SHALL DETERMINE WHICH PROGRAMS IT 11 CHOOSES TO IMPLEMENT TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS SECTION. 12 EACH UTILITY SHALL STRIVE TO IMPLEMENT A SET OF PROGRAMS THAT, 13 TAKEN TOGETHER, ARE COST-EFFECTIVE. 14 (4) A UTILITY MAY USE FUNDS PROVIDED BY OTHER ENTITIES, 15 INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION A WHOLESALE ELECTRIC POWER 16 PROVIDER, STATE GOVERNMENT, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENT, TOWARD 17 MEETING ITS SPENDING REQUIREMENTS UNDER THIS SECTION. 18 (5) AUTILITYMAYIMPLEMENT ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAMS ON 19 ITS OWN, IN PARTNERSHIP WITH OTHER UTILITIES, BY PROVIDING FUNDING 20 TO THE GOVERNOR'S ENERGY OFFICE TO ADMINISTER ENERGY EFFICIENCY 21 PROGRAMS ON ITS BEHALF, OR BY A COMBINATION OF THE THREE 22 METHODS, AT ITS OPTION. 23 (6) A UTILITY MAY EXEMPT ITSELF FROM THE SPENDING 24 REQUIREMENTS OF THIS SECTION IN A PARTICULAR YEAR, BUT ONLY FOR 25 THAT YEAR, IF THE UTILITY'S RETAIL ELECTRICITY SALES, IN 26 MEGAWATT-HOURS, FOR THAT YEAR FALL THREE PERCENT OR MORE 27 BELOW THE UTILITY'S SALES, IN MEGAWATT-HOURS, FOR THE -5- 2b 1 IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING YEAR. 2 (7) THE GOVERNOR'S ENERGY OFFICE MAY HIRE AND OVERSEE ONE 3 OR MORE QUALIFIED AND IMPARTIAL CONTRACTORS TO IMPLEMENT 4 ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAMS FOR A UTILITY IF THAT UTILITY CHOOSES 5 TO PROVIDE FUNDING TO THE GOVERNOR'S ENERGY OFFICE FOR THIS 6 PURPOSE. THE GOVERNOR'S ENERGY OFFICE MAY CHARGE A UTILITY A 7 REASONABLE MANAGEMENT FEE, NOT TO EXCEED TEN PERCENT OF THE 8 FUNDS IT RECEIVES, IF THE UTILITY CHOOSES TO HAVE THE GOVERNOR'S 9 ENERGY OFFICE ADMINISTER ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAMS ON ITS 10 BEHALF. 11 40-3.3-105. Accounting - reports. (1) EACH UTILITY SHALL 12 TRACK PROGRAM EXPENDITURES AND EVALUATE THE COSTS AND BENEFITS 13 OF ITS ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAMS. 14 (2) ON OR BEFORE APRIL 30, 2010, AND ON OR BEFORE APRIL 30 15 OF EACH YEAR THEREAFTER, EACH UTILITY SHALL SUBMIT AN ANNUAL 16 REPORT FOR THE IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING YEAR TO THE GOVERNOR'S 17 ENERGY OFFICE. ANNUAL REPORTS SHALL CONTAIN INFORMATION ON THE 18 ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAMS IMPLEMENTED BY THE UTILITY; PROGRAM 19 EXPENDITURES; PROGRAM EXPENDITURES AS AFRACTION OF RETAIL SALES 20 REVENUE; ENERGY SAVINGS IMPACTS AND THE TECHNIQUES USED TO 21 ESTIMATE THESE IMPACTS; THE ESTIMATED COSTS, BENEFITS, AND 22 COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF THE ENERGY EFFICIENCYPROGRAMS; AND OTHER 23 INFORMATION REQUESTED BY THE GOVERNOR'S ENERGY OFFICE. 24 (3) THE GOVERNOR'S ENERGYOFFICE SHALLREVIEWEACHREPORT 25 SUBMITTED PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION AND, IF THE GOVERNOR'S ENERGY 26 OFFICE DEEMS IT APPROPRIATE, PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE UTILITIES TO 27 HELP THEM IMPROVE THEIR ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAMS. -6- 2b 1 (4) THE GOVERNOR'S ENERGY OFFICE SHALL COMPILE 2 INFORMATION ON ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAMS IMPLEMENTED BY 3 UTILITIES AND PROVIDE A REPORT WITH SUCH INFORMATION BIENNIALLY 4 TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY. EACH BIENNIAL REPORT SHALL INCLUDE A 5 LIST OF WHICH UTILITIES ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE ENERGY 6 EFFICIENCY PROGRAM SPENDING REQUIREMENT SPECIFIED IN SECTION 7 40-3.3-104 (1) (a) AND WHICH UTILITIES, IF ANY, ARE NOT; INFORMATION 8 ON OVERALL ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAM EXPENDITURES, ENERGY 9 SAVINGS, AND NET ECONOMICBENEFITS; AND ANYRECOMMENDATIONS TO 10 THE GENERALASSEMBLY FORLEGISLATIVE CHANGES TOIENHANCE ENERGY 11 EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION. 12 SECTION 2. 40-9.5-114.5, Colorado Revised Statutes, is 13 amended to read: 14 40-9.5-114.5. Applicability of specified sections. (1) The 15 provisions of sections 40-9.5-108 to 40-9.5-112 shall be applicable to all 16 cooperative electric associations with membership of more than 17 twenty-five thousand members whether regulated under this part 1 or the 18 "Public Utilities Law", articles 1 to 7 of this title. 19 (2) ARTICLE 3.3 OFTHIS TITLE SHALL APPLY TO ALL COOPERATIVE 20 ELECTRIC ASSOCIATIONS WITH MEMBERSHIP OF MORE THAN FIVE 21 THOUSAND MEMBERS WHETHER REGULATED UNDER THIS PART 1 OR THE 22 "PUBLIC UTILITIES LAW", ARTICLES 1 TO 7 OF THIS TITLE. 23 SECTION 3. Effective date. This act shall take effect July 1, 24 2008. 25 SECTION 4. Safety clause. The general assembly hereby finds, 26 determines, and declares that this act is necessary for the immediate 27 preservation of the public peace, health, and safety. -7- 2b From Dave Lock Good morning: Yesterday, CAMU convened a meeting of the four large municipal generators in Colorado (Colorado Springs, MEAN, ARPA and Platte River). We discussed the Governor's Climate Action Plan and steps we can take to respond to the governor's request that munis report to him about what actions they will take to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The group agreed to meet by teleconference monthly and that CAMU will act as a convener and facilitator of the process. As you can see by the attached document, the Governor's Energy Office expects our report to be in by the end of June. Very briefly, the governor's Climate Action Plan calls for the state's electric utilities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 20% below 2005 levels by 2020. That's a very challenging goal, which will require generators and distribution utilities to work together in concert. Representatives from the Governor's Energy Office will be at the Feb. 8th CAMU meeting in Loveland to more fully discus this endeavor. I urge everyone to attend that meeting. Additionally, anvone who would like to work with the muni generators to devise our response to the governor is welcome. Our next meeting (via teleconference) is Feb. 12th at 9 a.m. If vou would like to be a part of this team. let me know and I will make sure vou're on the list. Governor's Energy Office Process 4 "Practicality and Reliability are non-negotiable." 4 Expect plans to be developed by the 2nd Quarter of 2008 o E.g. June 30th 4 "Business as usual" versus future plans - a good faith effort o Conceptual o Not expecting a matrix with a lot of analysis o Numbers in CAP associated with specific programs are "illustrative suggestions;" not prescriptive 2c. Governor's Energy Office Process 4 "Practicality and Reliability are non-negotiable." 4 Expect plans to be developed by the 2nd Quarter of 2008 o E.g. June 30th 4 "Business as usual" versus future plans - a good faith effort o Conceptual o Not expecting a matrix with a lot of analysis o Numbers in CAP associated with specific programs are "illustrative suggestions;" not prescriptive 4 Ideas to consider o Aggregated wind projects o Bulk, collaborative CFL purchases o Ramping up DSM and energy efficiency efforts - even above and beyond what they are today 4 GEO wants to be a partner; not seen as a "regulator" o A new, full-time associate will be tasked to work exclusively with munis and co-ops o Developing funding for: â€¢ PV projects â€¢ Domestic hot water projects â€¢ Micro wind projects â€¢ Grants for energy audits of industrial and large commercial customers o A clearing-house for idea exchanges 2c. - 4 Ideas to consider o Aggregated wind projects o Bulk, collaborative CFL purchases o Ramping up DSM and energy efficiency efforts - even above and beyond what they are today 4 GEO wants to be a partner; not seen as a "regulator" o A new, full-time associate will be tasked to work exclusively with munis and co-ops o Developing funding for: â€¢ PV projects â€¢ Domestic hot water projects â€¢ Micro wind projects â€¢ Grants for energy audits of industrial and large commercial customers o A clearing-house for idea exchanges 2c. Page 1 of 1 Frdm: Bob Goehring Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 9:01 AM To: Laura Schmidt Subject: Solar Rebate Governor's Energy Office Dan Hodges from Colorado Springs, CAMU Lobbyist Jerry Braden and I met with GEO Director Tom Plant and four of his staff members this morning. Two legislators, Sen. Jim Isgar, D-Hesperus and Rep. Judy Solano, D-Brighton are planning to run bills that would require net metering for all Colorado utilities. The governor has indicated he supports each of the state's utilities offering net metering. However, he and his staff are cognizant of the differences between the types of utilities (e.g. munis, REAs and IOUs) and the different way each individual utility structures its rates. The governor's bottom line will be that each utility offers a net metering program and that each makes available a payment for customer-generated electricity on a kWh-kWh basis. Each utility would be able to structure its own rates and programs, so long as these elements are present. We communicated that flexibility in the design of net metering programs and rate structures is of paramount importance to munis and the GEO agrees and understands. The GEO may be our ally in helping to hold the line against more intrusive and prescriptive ideas advanced, especially by Rep. Solano. No one has seen drafts of the legislation yet. The GEO indicated it hopes to make available matching funds of $2 per watt to expedite the installation of solar and other renewable systems on site at customers' homes and businesses. The money would be available to all utilities. Finally, the GEO is ramping up to work with individual municipal utilities and REAs to assist them with energy efficiency programs and looking at developing - or encouraging utilities to develop - a system whereby energy efficiency improvements can be funded by utilities and paid back through monthly bills. No details. I invited the GEO to attend the February CAMU meeting to explain more fully some of its ideas. Dave Lock 2cl. file:/A\Button\laura c\WPDOCS\Utilities Committee Memos\2008 UC memos\1. January UC 2008\LPR2 .... 1/11/2008 Finance Department Memo To: Utilities Committee From: Steve McFarland, Finance Officer Date: January 9,2008 Subject: L&P Loan update Background The following is an update on the L&P bond issuance: 1. The Town received an "A+" rating due to its excellent financial track record in the L&P fund. 2. The interest rate is a (very) favorable 3.875% for 20 years. A rate closer to 4.25-4.38% was expected. 3. The par amount of the bond issuance was $6,180,000. Soft costs (closing costs, surety bond, etc) totaled $146,126.07, leaving $6,033,873.93 available for construction costs. 4. The funds were delivered on December 13,2007 to a special account set up in Colo Trust and await distribution as the project moves forward. Budget There is no cost associated with this memorandum. Action steps requested There is no action step requested with this memorandum. 3. TOWN of ESTES PARK -Â® Utilities and Public Works Departments ESTES PARK INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM COLORADO DATE: January 10, 2008 TO: Utilities Committee FROM: Bob Goehring SUBJECT: Marys Lake Sub-station update Background: The upgrade of the Marys Lake Sub-station began in Februal 2007. These improvements have been scheduled for May to November 2008. Platte River's cost estimate was $3,860,000 to replace the Sub-station: Platte River's portion: $360,000 Town of Estes Park's portion: $3,500,000 Platte River will design build the Sub-station and the Town of Estes Park will reimburse them at the end of the project the same way we did with the Estes Park Sub-station in 1998. The attached spreadsheet shows actual costs and a revised total cost-to-date. Budget 2008 Bond Amount for this project. $4,000,000 Cost based on Platte River Est. update $4,033,000 Recommendation: There is no action step requested with this memorandum. 4-1 1Â¥1 rev 3 9/20/2007 Marv's Lake Switchqear and Transformer Replacement Estimate 2008 QTY Price Total Cost responsibility Transformers actuals FR3 Oil 2 $1,227,1093 $2,459,713 Estes Estes Transformer 1998 $440,000 Transformer Foundation 2 $25,000 $50,000 Estes Oil containment 2 $20,000 $40,000 Estes Circuit Switcher 2 $35,000 $70,000 PRPA C.S. Foundation 2 $5,000 $10,000 PRPA Switch 2 $5,500 $11,000 PRPA Switch Foundation 2 $4,000 $8,000 PRPA Switchgear Isle 1 $1,083,492 $1,083,492 Estes Estes Switchgear 1998 $600,000 SWGR Foundation 1 $50,000 $50,000 Estes Construction 1 $150,000 $150,000 50% Estes Removal of transformers 2 $40,000 $80,000 Estes Removal of building 1 $20,000 $20,000 Estes old CS removal 2 $5,000 $10,000 PRPA Contingency 1 $150,000 $150,000 50% Estes PRPA cost & misc work 1 $200,000 $200,000 50% Estes Total with FR3 $4,392,205 Estes cost FR3 $4,033,205 PRPA Cost $359,000Total minus Estes cost 4-2 I f . 1/9/2008 Water Sales by Month ($) 350,000 - 300,000 - =11,6 - 4 * 4 * - 250,000 - - 3 4-5-3 200,000 - ,/ Il I a. Â¤2005 I , I , 02006 ,Â¢** 150,000 --~- Eli-i- 4-4-4 -~ --El Â¤2007 rA M #:5*5 100,000 -- ~ &-5-9-4-6-E 5 5 % 4 5 M 453 50,000 ~ 4-/7-4-:-5 -8 M - : 2 5 4 1 5 4 1% 2% -- 0- Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Water Sales Year-To-Date ($1,000) 3,000 $2,816,572 2,500 92005 - 2,000 M 2006 - -7 92007 1 1/. 7 #. 1,500 -Budget - - 8 8 8 4.75% 2007 YTD VS 2006 , 1 1 1,000 _r-j-j-j-{ - $33*8 500~ rm m-1 1-t-1- ~ .-m-j- - - '' 1 a , t. /3.5j3 45-111â‚¬ Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec RW5 1 ,. , ::1 1 @232,231Â£ :220&231:f f ZE i 22 69% & EZEBC =59==0% m =gn 2Â§1 WRim" 5 8 S E B o B BBS# 5 - e O 01 g Oci @Res; M O-- M $ O 9 - - N 7 -*t-r.* ON- E 1 2 N 04 en #5*2408 N m & 5 5 BaBSE M t $ O /1 r, 2 - M * 2 - 06 d co + 4 01 Am=== 2*34* 2. $ 4% 8 7 M ./ .1 01 .9 *Â§888*8 1 Â§ doodo 000Â©000 Eli Â§Â§Â§Â§8Â§1 doodd odooddo Â°~528* glo,M-0 EGO- :id,gis @â‚¬* - el tr,~Ochoo .90 . 55 t- i W -*-el - M 4.0 M #fA os:52*Â©5 6 0, 2 I ON M * h th Mhoof. 4%44 -- O - 5532 2 5 & 00 2 4 *Ritt 0=AggÂ©Â§ 2 * 0 B 00 0 9 E@* Z 0 1Â§0 22<0 1 -8 0 7% nE % Ems 0.1.SEE - Â°A+19Â°20&9 M 00 N /1 W M - @8~M.9 g . N N . M~~â‚¬0~22 ~ 1 - 2,5 ~ =10.00<0+* 8 g Â¥ 2 0 2 1 22 CM -2 ffl# 50 Z 3 2* . .0. a. 3 J. u 2=,10 m g mOOH DATE MONTH TO DATE YEAR TO DATE YEAR TO DATE unrestricted (usable) fund balance 4,094,208 3,297,192 $3,297.192 $3,297,192 10'99 I *t$ E!0'99 I 'M EfO'991'#$ aourieq pury (0141?sn) poloutsanm Nmpug LE'Et[ V/N (6LE'ECI) 6LE'ZE! 0 (119'fl) [I9'EZ SDOmOS .1011,0 0, P)800I11!/paA!0001 [ISIO E 014'90Â£ 1000 100*0 (5*5) 014'902 58COOE AR YTD Y~ VAR Pe at Per Gal Buc 180'001 0000 (688) KSI'Eli 598'901 (LLE) 06['9 2006 2 2007 100'0 000*0 tRio'191) 5*L'86E LEL'9Â£ I 399'05 -0 9000 Cim'091) L90'56L'E 9Â£0[9'3 381'ty 8L9'fI E 098'813 38,055 123,362 132 kE'ZI 85L'LLO'E 666'680'E astiodxa gouuumulopÂ¢ puu uoile.Jodo *Â£6'8*1 It5'9t,L L09'L65 (9*67*) 96['85 (101!deo olopq sam,!P[ NE'[LE 023'898 L09'L6F (9[â‚¬62) 408'[L 621'10[ muotu JOJ tronisod qsej m 02â€žmio EE (3 152:22 2,457, I 89 2,580,4]8 Wttct:opment Tap Fees 82,301 178,31 319,999 2485~1 (473~ 3, E 3,9 Â£1'509 **DRAFT** FLOW COMPARISON rights Tap Fees JOAO SOllUDAN JO /[OUO!0!Jap/ssomâ‚¬D 1 Maintenance Expense I , 1 Â£61'tEES | :Japun/JOAO poloofold ELS'5*E'Z$ :138pnq 592695'2$ :ooed s!41 le Senu@Aol lenulre %00 I L+I'*IZ$ .SAD 10/MCI# %001 %9 6[Â§71$ %89- 9Â£0'86â‚¬1 AWK Wns L5*Ells t[Â§'LI Loo~0$ %56 %5 9*00 1 $ %Â£'0 NCI 19' 1 66 18!oloutu!00 Ininki EE'Et$ Et'VE Â£ 190$ %06 %91 Â£19'55$ %01 - Â£86'864'f 90Â£' 1 luiluOpiso~I IBInti Lt-ZLS 8Â£1'81 too'05 99 %LZ 61+'L5$ %3.0- OZO'960,1 68L [2101Â®UnUOO Ueqlf-1 5-5-62$ L19't LOO'0$ %LE %LE 0Z9'6L$ %/1 L18'170'El E69'E IB!11!ap!SOM uecpfl }SnO/ADM 15noAe) 129/Agy uino SAOM 101 SOnUOA 031 4:h\019 leD Sloou JO # SAÂ¥ SAV SAV JO % JO % 12101 % Imol 08813AE SUIAOUI IpUOUI - ZI LO-leqUI,03<l 311!a Kleurums adkl SCINE31111,NEINIMVdaa MalVAA NMVd SEILSE{ AO NAAO.L i 1 1 - 2006 ZOE - Dea AoN 100 deS 6nv Inr unr XeM Jdv Jel/\1 qed uer Actual Water revenues over/beyond Budget 16.00% - 14.00% - 12.00% 10.00% %00-8 %00'9 - %00.17 9600.Z %00.0 i ; T . . ....................1...6...6...6...6... .9/* ------T----~-~~i~= - <01 1 Vee t 11& .....2....=......IN--------------<b 4 R % Water Revenue Progress 0 Budgeted Revenues 1 I ~~nues at Current )0 - )0 - )0 - )0 - )0 - - OC - OC - OC - OC - OC l. r Water Department Inter-Office Memorandum EST ES |BE| PARK COLORADO TO: Utilities Committee From: Jeff Boles and Bob Goehring Date: 1/10/2008 Re: Membrane Procurement Update Background Membrane Procurement bids were solicited at the end of 2007. There are two manufacturing companies that produce membrane filtration systems: US Filters (a subsidiary of Siemens Corporation), and Zenon (a subsidiary of General Electric). Both manufacturing companies returned bids. A bid opening took place on January 8,2008 at the HDR Engineering offices in Denver. The bids will be reviewed by the engineering firm; there are many elements to evaluate and we expect to have a bid supplier recommendation to bring to the Utilities Committee Meeting in February. In March an equipment pre- purchase amount of 10-15% will be required after the Notice of Award is given to the chosen bidder. Once the membrane supplier is chosen, HDR Engineering will begin to finalize the construction design based on physical requirements relating to the specific type of filtration. After completion of the construction drawings, those drawings will be submitted to the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment for approval. Requests for bids for a General Contractor are projected to go out around April or May. Negotiations for construction management of the project should take place during this same time period. Construction of the project is still estimated to begin in August 2008 and continue until June of 2009. Budget There is no cost associated with this memorandum Action steps requested There is no action step requested with this memorandum. 2. *DOWATERRES+ u -~.= COLORADO WATER RESOURCES & ~i,-4 POWER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY UE#LOPME # Logan Tower Bldg. - Suite 620, 1580 Logan Street, Denver, Colorado 80203-1942 303/830-1 550 0 Fax 303/832-8205 Â· info@cwrpda.com December 21, 2007 Mr. Bob Goehring Town of Estes Park 170 Macgregor Ave Estes Park, CO 80517 RE: Drinking Water Pre-Loan Planning and Design Assistance Grant Dear Mr. Goehring: The Colorado Water Resources and Power Development Authority (the "Authority") and the Water Quality Control Division (the "Division") have reviewed the Town of Estes Park's application for a planning and design grant related to the Town's Water System. I am pleased to inform you that a $10,000 grant is hereby offered to support a portion of the planning costs associated with the development of the Environmental Assessment and/or Engineering Design Documents. This grant is intended to help the Town bring actual construction work for the water system to fruition in a timely manner. Funding for the engineering study is made possible through a coordinated effort between the Authority and the Division. A contractual agreement conveying the $10,000 grant obligation is attached. Please sign the agreement, make a copy for your records and return the executed agreement to: Colorado Water Resources and Power Development Authority Attention: Keith Mclaughlin 1580 Logan Street, Suite 620 Denver, Colorado 80203 The Division's staff will be responsible for managing this grant and the Authority will distribute the funds upon the Division's approval. Please contact Robert Hilleaas at the Division at 303.692.3137 for payment disbursement information. Be aware that appropriate expenditure documentation must accompany requests for reimbursement (Attachment A) and the expenses noted on the invoice(s) must be incurred after the effective date of this agreement. In addition, a completed Environmental Assessment and Engineering Design Documents must be submitted to the WQCD for approval prior to disbursement of final grant funds. As noted in bold on the Revo/ving Fund Pre-Loan P/anning/Design Grant Agreement, if the Contractor does not borrow funds from this program, a waiver from reimbursing the grant must be requested from the Authority's Board of Directors. Best wishes to you in successfully accomplishing this work. Sincerely, . ~Keith Mclaughlin ~/ ~ L-, Assistant Finance Director Attachment - Town of Estes Park's Pre-loan Planning and Design Assistance Grant Agreement 3. Attachment A - Request for Reimbursement CC: Carolyn Schachterle, WQCD Barry Cress, DOLA 7-3 ..7-2. .- M / 1 . '.4 V 4 4 -7 I I 4 - t." 81 2 4 -1,/ 14 . I ' - â‚¬41 (D -C ; 1,-7.e.xr ...AL'-1 / 95 . .>U y *-r- VA be / '14 01 nu 1 I 0 1 4 f ?9 .0 ,- 1 l, 11 I * J 4: ..7 V j' %.94 /4*i#I \ f 6 k . â„¢t 7.1. 9/ :540 i 47 . - . r y ZA C ./ , e 'It 1 .-. 47 2-~ el 3 le .66'bt .t . I '14 .,91 /4/ .\ f 1/ 4 . / -jif}i At * L 94~ pgaff --- aÂ» 2 >2/y/ ibi~J J â€¢- .U /1 ' AD . 1 Cbl KE .i- '40/ fol i *412 224 9 e-- 00 9 .@ 0/ 1 ,) U) a b 01 f &8(1) ;IN #, >. 1-LI O ..c, -(51 / â€ž14 7 1 3. I - . -00 1 L O L * (D (D X U. N , 44. (D u 5 ,% o:. Af *. I 24,4/0~ rjkj ,. p ig*> ~ Mtv. fizt 241 9 -2 470 00 ffi JY 73 2 6.99 0 '1 0 0 -Sar 12â€¢ 1 & f?- 1,4 4,, ,=+ U /1 91 4 14* i CE atE -,1 V - . I rk C u - , tz v , E r . 11 LU 423 $3 4 . wt <> s ~ LO 2/2 -540 E u;. 1> -6. ~ 71 M I 4%95,3 - I. 1 - . . Â·4. .1 Â» I ~-YA. --3 1 I h# 1 0 Â»N * I ./ â€¢ 1 4 & . 6 0 I t (D J ... 4 0 .- p e g Â· : "'4422 V - â‚¬4 C E â‚¬ -2 0 E ~ 0 .6 -> 0 -C t.. (1) 2.0 9 . 6. 4- - - '%Â© / E.G . f 72 12 01~ 00Â¤gg *0 e W E â‚¬ Â§ 2 .v . 2 mi \i o m 62Â· rk' 2 I 4- A e E -6 -9 1- Â¢2 0 8 B 2 2 6- 00 - Â¤.. Q- .2 8, A .2 >Â·a. 4, MA M M. 43 -P.2 /i t 1 2 X . 7 Â· g 2..- p Â·g 0-k CE %2= = O E:% k , C O-0 2 . air-b -2 S 5 @ ~ 2'15â€¢z.~2 bfÂ·qi] u. t \*, E Ji -e 0 0 -NE 3~4- 4~vaL -8 D. .trE' S U) b :E....13# - 0 -O ----U-- AD 4(1) f wi *-. U L * m. d @2- . E 5 12 5 4 .5 06 5 Â·S b * u 2 -0 -M OL E 2 12' 72 E m o~.0+ t>'1 32 0 O 094)= L S 4% S Â·E m u 16 0- 15*\ CL Â® ; 1 u.i 2 83!r O :E *8! R L ria C. 8- C.- Ui .;E '42 Ul O ./,. .... 11 - f\.4 1 74-, 0 b , - Town of Estes Park Energy Efficiency Measures/ Mangels 77-3583* " Bioodid erd o itesting an os) X6ieu For. more infok 0*jo tA U 0 4, h = 0 -C 2 1 2 ... (1) 0 U th Ir C e th 41 6. t. r.4 ) 4 - 9 0 1 E rÂ«Vit .1.~Â·- > 6 -S E 0 1-'. 4. I U 0 Ch 2 4- L 4â‚¬ 100 00 %12>*34 . 0 -0 1 U U E 1? :rc. A & (D .5 0) ha 0)1- 1 ~OV 0= Â¥2 0 4) > Â» 45 4 0Â£ 0 Q.a) 1 . 98 QA 4 3 '4 - 4 ~30 00 - 0. Â¤ 17Â·- : /9 r- C â‚¬ 1% We e 04 4 Om O- I 0 C h 6 -2 l~ -O .G SE -2* -0 3 hib U~ 42 ... ?Claptâ‚¬,P t*At & 1*partmeAt L&P has changed out "all" mercury vapor streetlights a<cl frtgefÂ·u.6 tki ellfif'OKI,(eltt. â€¢ Certified Energy Manager on Decorative Streetlight â€¢ LED Christmas Decorations â€¢ Loss evaluated distribution - se!4!1!304 41) Slue+SXS VaVDS I 04 uo!#Dinsul 04 6u!AD4 LUOJJ sn tsn!PD Jo pedsu! Al'D art &00% 06 tkogÂ® steps,,, staff since 1996 sesn - Su!ploei Jetew etowea Bu!~eAD.14 X6.leuessel Jedod eD!#Jo speiqs ,401 e41 04 peu6!sep se.Inenits e#Dkl ' Aoue!)!:Be X13.leue e60.Inooue Exchange g windows in 1980 transformers el!5 uo he downtown Bul,Xoe.1 ee.14 SDLU+S!140 ' Stuep!sej ol pe.le} pUD St!) leADS le#DAA S.le}#O 0 spoeq Je/*04S AAO~#-/AO~ 04 peu6!sep se.Inpnits e#1021 â€¢ koue!)!Be XEkleue 06 D.Inooue go..wod,Q Â·moM sesn jeBuol ou umol 641 I setold io sdn) woo,o.I4s s! Su!Pling pd!'!unw 641 ' U1O4 pup* Aq peie,Aod %00 L u]016oid pl'!AA .IeA!3 ettold 541 proaotiut eupe 4no Bu!6ul:)43 0 nt tueose.lonH selo Del pUD Muttieipd Buie