oklahoma public power - oklahoma municipal...

A publication of the Municipal Electric Systems of Oklahoma November 2012

In This Issue ...

OKLAHOMAPUBLIC POWER

• Employment Page 3 Opportunities

• Line Rodeo Brings Page 4 Recognition to MESO Cities

• New Offi ce Page 6 Administrator Begins at MESO• Coal or Gas? Page 8

Hydro and Tax Exempt Bonds Return as Issues for MESO Members

(see BONDS, page 2)

Joint Committee on Taxation Staff Drafts Plan that Would Tax Interest on Municipal Bonds

Interest on newly issued state and local bonds would be taxed under a tax reform scenario crafted by Thomas Barthold, chief of staff for the U.S. Congress's Joint Committee on Taxation.

Barthold described the plan, which he called "an experiment," in an Oct. 11 letter to the leaders of the Senate Finance Committee. The chief of staff said he had be-gun work on the plan, but fl eshed it out after Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., asked about the idea of ending all income tax deductions, credits, and exclusions—including the ex-emption for municipal bonds—to offset revenue lost from reducing federal income tax rates.

Hydropower issues had been relatively quiet until recently when a number of problems popped up in different areas. In October four state legislators wrote to Army Corps of Engineers to complain about low water levels at Lake Eufaula and stated that misman-agement of lake levels for hydro-power operations had resulted in the lake being too low for many recreational uses. Lakes are multi-purpose with hydropower being one of the purposes. But Eufaula was too low for much generation this summer, and the low lake level had something to do with

the on-going drought (maybe the legislators hadn’t heard of it).

Staff at MESO and South-western Power Resources As-sociation (the trade group for preference customers) responded with information to members and the legislators which points out that recreation businesses often ignore some facts when it comes to complaining about lake levels. The Corps of Engineers will not alter its schedules unless the new congressman for the district and our senators become involved. We don’t see this for Eufaula.

Also, we are watching two

transmission proposals. One by ITC, the large private transmission operator, calls for 2,700 miles of new transmission to move wind power to the east from Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas. The other is the Clean Lines LLC proposal to build a DC transmission line from our region to Tennessee where wind power could be distributed in the Southeast. Both proposals could impact rates for transmis-sion for cities. As reviews are done, we will be ready to com-ment.

In addition to taxing interest on state and local bonds issued after Dec. 31, 2012, Barthold's "experi-ment" would repeal all itemized deductions that now are allowed on federal tax returns, including the deduction for homeowners' mortgages. The proposal also would raise revenue by taxing capital gains and dividends as regular income, not at reduced rates.

In his letter to Baucus and to Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, rank-ing Republican on the Finance Committee, Barthold said that ending the itemized deductions and the exemption on municipal bond interest would save enough money to cut federal income tax

rates by 4 percent. The proposal assumes that the

2001 and 2003 tax act provisions would expire and that current-law statutory rates and policies would

(see HYDRO, page 6)

MESO November 2012 Newsletter

*Job Training & Safety Participants

GRDA*Hominy*Hope, Ark*Kaw CityKingfi sher*LaverneLexington*Lindsay*Mangum*ManitouMannford*Marlow*Miami*Monett, Mo*Mooreland*Newkirk*Okeene*OlusteeOMPA*OrlandoParagould, ArkParis, ArkPawhuska*Pawnee*Perry*Ponca City*

Pond Creek*Poplar Bluff, MoPrague*Prescott, Ark*Purcell*Pryor*RyanSallisaw*Siloam Springs, Ark*Skiatook*South CoffeyvilleSpiro*Stillwater*Stilwell*Stroud*Tahlequah*Tecumseh*Tonkawa*Wagoner*Walters*Watonga*Waurika*Waynoka*WetumkaWynnewoodYale*

MESO MEMBER UTILITIES

Altus*AnadarkoBenton, Ark*Bentonville, Ark*Blackwell*BramanBroken BowBurlingtonByngClarksville, Ark*Claremore*Coffeyville, KansasCollinsville*Comanche*CopanCordell*Cushing*Duncan*Edmond*EldoradoElk CityFairview*Fort SupplyFrederick*Geary*Goltry*Granite*

MESO BOARD OF DIRECTORS & STAFF

PresidentDan Blankenship, Stillwater

President ElectDean Sherrick, Edmond

Vice PresidentDavid Slezickey, Kingfi sher

Secretary / TreasurerTim Schook, Stroud

DirectorsDaryl Golbek, ClaremorePhil Johnston, Ponca City

Paul McAlexander, PawhuskaPam Polk, Collinsville

Gary Pruett, PryorDavid Yeager, Duncan

General ManagerShane Woolbright

Offi ce AdministratorDeborah Miner

Director of Professional Development

Tom RiderAdministrative Assistant

Tammie MurdochTraining and Safety Instructors

Greg SeverRon Nemecek

LGTC Testing ProfessionalMichelle Danner

MESO OFFICE308 N.E. 27th Street

Oklahoma City, OK 73105-2717(405)528-7564 or (800) 636-MESO

(405)524-5095 FAXwww.meso.org

take effect as planned on Jan. 1, 2013. Specifi cally, it assumes that on Jan. 1, 2013, federal income tax rate brackets will increase to 15 percent, 28 percent, 31 per-cent, 36 percent and 39.6 per-cent. Under the Joint Committee on Taxation scenario, those rates would be cut to 14.4 percent, 26.88 percent, 29.76 percent, 34.56 percent and 38.02 percent.

The exclusion for state and local bond interest would be the only above-the-line deduction repealed.

The Barthold experiment includes a number of revenue-losing provisions: it would repeal the individual alternative minimum tax and would repeal the overall

Bonds (continued from page 1) limitation on itemized deductions and personal exemptions for high-income earners.

The plan was immediately criticized by Hatch and by David Camp, R-Mich., chairman of the House Ways and Means Com-mittee, but neither of the law-makers mentioned the provision that would end the exemption on municipal bonds.

Instead, press releases issued by Ways and Means and Hatch's offi ce objected to the proposal's assumption that the 2001 and 2003 tax cut provisions enacted under President Bush will expire, rather than assuming that those tax cuts will be extended.

Hatch and Camp also objected to the plan’s proposal to tax capi-

tal gains and dividends as regular income, rather than at reduced rates.

The Joint Committee on Taxa-tion "experiment" has not been backed by any elected offi cial – at least not publicly. It is signifi cant, though, because it shows that the tax-exempt status of state and lo-cal bonds is considered a feasible target for repeal.


DISTRIBUTION LINEMANMunicipal Utility Board, City of Pryor. Salary

Range: $21.02 per hour to $27.32 per hour depend-ing on qualifi cations. The Utility Board provides an excellent benefi t package that includes Health, Dental, Life and Disability Insurance, Vacation, Sick Leave, and Retirement Plan. Applicant must perform highly skilled work on the installation, maintenance, and repair of the city’s municipal electrical utility system. Incumbents’ will work on energized primary and secondary electrical distribution lines both over-head and underground. Position requires education equivalent to completion of high school and the expe-rience necessary to work both from a wooden pole with climbers and from an aerial platform. Resumes to including employment history and education can be sent to the offi ce of the Municipal Utility Board, PO Box 249, Pryor, OK 74362-0249 or e-mailed to [email protected]. For additional information you may contact Gary Pruett, General Manager at

EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES918 825-2100. Applications accepted until position is fi lled.

ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER / OPERATIONS

The Municipal Utility Board / City of Pryor, Okla-homa is accepting résumé’s for the above position. This position will be responsible for supervising the daily operations of the electric, water, gas, and sani-tary sewer distribution systems. Applicant must be knowledgeable in the administration of a municipal utility system and possess strong leadership skills. Starting salary for the position will be negotiable de-pending on qualifi cations. Employee benefi ts include Health, Dental, Life and Disability Insurance, Sick and Vacation Leave, Retirement Plan, and twelve paid holidays. Send résumé including employment history and education to Attention: General Man-ager, Municipal Utility Board, PO Box 249, Pryor, OK 74362-0249 or email to [email protected]. For additional information you may contact Gary Pruett, General Manager at (918) 825-2100.


MESO and Edmond Electric held their third annual Lineworker Rodeo on October 19 at the Edmond Electric/MESO training fi eld. This event has brought much recognition to the program. The Saturday, October 20, edition of the Daily Oklahoman carried a half page of photos of member linemen in the competition, and the U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Apprentice and Train-ing will post photos of the event to celebrate the 25 year relationship of the Bureau and MESO in doing approved training. Next year we hope to have a major event as we get ready for the April 2014 National Lineworker Rodeo to be held in Edmond. Along with that event, Edmond will be the host for the APPA Engineering and Opera-tions Workshop which is APPA’s second largest event.

This year nine cities partici-pated. We had many participants but for brevity, we will list winners only in the various events. In the individual events, Roger Noland of Walters took fi rst in the journey-man speed climb, Kyle Stanley of Stillwater took fi rst in the journey-man hurt man rescue, Jonathon Noles of Stillwater took fi rst in the apprentice lineman obstacle course, Josh Mares of Duncan took fi rst in the apprentice speed climb, and Jake Marshall of Still-water took fi rst in the apprentice hurt man rescue.

In the team events, we had teams from one city compete in changing out overhead line equip-ment. The fi rst place team was from Edmond and composed of Shannon Dodd, Wes Bennett, and Ed Drake. The Mutual Aid event put lineworkers from different cit-ies together to replace overhead line equipment simulated to have damage as from a storm. The fi rst place team was Roger Noland,

Line Rodeo Brings Recognition to MESO Cities

First place in Mutual Aid Event went to Jake Marshall of Stillwater, Shannon Dodd of Edmond, and Roger Noland of Walters

Apprentice Speed Climb winner Josh Mares of Duncan Power

Journeyman Speed Climb Winner Roger Noland of Walters


MESO Associate Members

Allgeier, Martin & Associates, Inc.

Altec Industries

American Public Power Administration

Atkins Benham, Inc.

APOGEE Interactive, Inc

C.H. Guernsey & Company

Call Okie

EDG International, Inc.

Equipment Technology, Inc.

ESC Engineering

Fleharty Engineering

Fred Oberlender & Associates

Garver, LLC

Global Power Products

Grand River Dam Authority

Green Equipment Company

Hometown Connections

Horizon Fleet Services, Inc.

Jaco Construction, Inc.

Local Government Testing Consortium

Marathon Electric Co.

Municipal Finance Services, Inc.

NESCO Sales & Rentals

Northwest Transformers Co., Inc.

Oklahoma Municipal Power Authority

Protective Equipment Testing Laboratory

Siemens Industry, Inc.

Solomon Corporation

Sooner Meter Sales & Service

Southwestern Power Administration

Southwestern Power Resource Association

Utility Equipment Leasing Corp.

MESO General Manager Shane Woolbright presents fi rst place

award to Kyle Stanley of Stillwater for the Speed Climb.

Apprentice Obstacle Course Winner Jonathon Noles of Stillwater

Shannon Dodd, and Jake Mar-shall who all carried home two fi rst place trophies.

Trophies were hand built by Shannon Dodd and Wes Bennett of Edmond Electric. Thanks to both for their help in developing the event. Judges for the event included Pete Salter of Laverne, John Bland of Siloam Springs, Bil-ly Longnecker of Stillwater, Aaron Michaud of Ponca City, Terry Knox of MESO, and Jeff Dan, Sean Simmons, Jason Smith, and David Wetherell of Edmond Electric.

The MESO Rodeo is planned

by a committee of members including many of the judges and participants listed above. However, special thanks goes to Michelle Trimberger of Edmond Electric who does the member contact, registration, coordination, and offi ce planning for the entire production. Without Michelle, we would not have the signifi cant rec-ognition we receive from sponsor-ship of the event.

Tentative date for next year’s rodeo is October 18. Mark your calendars and plan to have staff attend this really great event.

Member NewsMary Rupp has been named as

new city manager in Perry. Mary spent many years as assistant city manager in Stillwater. We’re happy to have her back in the MESO family.

MESO held four workshops for

natural gas distribution cities in October on regulators, valves, and pressure testing. Four more work-shops will be held in December on tapping, purging, and corrosion control. Two will be in Pryor and two will be in Oklahoma City.


ALLGEIER, MARTIN ALLGEIER, MARTIN andand

ASSOCIATES, INC.ASSOCIATES, INC.Consulting Engineers • Hydrologists • Surveyors

RRate Studies Long Range Plans

Design and Construction Management Substations, Transmission and Distribution

SCADA and Communication Systems CAD Mapping

GIS/FM-Relaying and Control

BNBN!!Since 1954

Corporate Office 2820 S. Range Line Road Joplin, MO 64804 417.624.5703

Hydro Division 112 West 8th Street

Rolla, MO 65401 573.341.9487

www.amce.com

Contact Dave Garrison at 918.638.7857

New Offi ce Administrator Begins at MESOMESO is proud to announce

that Deborah Miner has been ap-pointed as Director of Accounting and Administration for the asso-ciation. She will handle all aspects of accounting and offi ce manage-ment for MESO and its affi liate organizations. Deborah is well known to many members from her time as city clerk for the City of Tonkawa and her service on the planning committee for the Public Power Workshop and the Energy Services Committee and the Certi-fi ed Utility Program Committee at OMPA. She most recently was city

clerk for the City of Harrah where she was selected as Member of the Year by the Oklahoma Mu-nicipal Clerks, Treasurers, and Finance Offi cers Association. The award was presented to her during the awards breakfast at the Oklahoma Municipal League Annual Conference on September 27 in Oklahoma City. She also serves on the board of directors for the Oklahoma Hall of Fame for City and Town Offi cials.

Deborah has dual degrees in business administration and accounting from Northwestern

Oklahoma State University and has completed many certifi cation courses including those for Master Municipal Clerk, Certifi ed Public Finance Administrator and Public Funds Administrator, and Certifi ed Municipal Offi cial.

She was highly involved in the city of Harrah in its Go Green project, its tourism board, in the Concerts in the Park series, and the Harrah Education Foundation. Deborah is excited to be able to again work with the many friends and associates she has in the MESO community.

Also of note is the fact that Congress again has folks looking at the federal tax exemption on municipal bonds. The elimination of the exemption would provide more funds for the Congress to reduce the defi cit, and those funds would come from higher premiums on bonds for all munici-pal purposes. We have seen this proposal in the past and would

Hydro (continued from page 1) hope to set it aside once again. Interestingly, there are some short-term bonds that cities or power agencies could issue at this time where the bonds would be cheaper if they were taxable.

The rate is so low for high qual-ity debt that there is no spread, and the bond market has no great appetite for government bonds after seeing many public agencies default on debt.

This space

for lease.For advertising

information,contact

[email protected].


Coal or Gas?by Shane WoolbrightMESO General Manager

In the next year or two, utilities in Oklahoma will be making the largest fi nancial decisions in their histories as they wrestle with the decisions of whether to continue to have coal as a primary genera-tion fuel or move to natural gas. Yes, wind, solar, landfi ll gas, and conservation are available, but those technologies will never take care of our base load needs unless every home springs for $15,000 in solar panels.

The decisions come about because coal-fi red plants are coming to the point where they need major upgrades. Most were built from 1976-1986. Upgrad-ing a plant requires the plant to meet Clean Air Act requirements. While costly, the upgrades are not nearly as costly as adding new gas generation which has doubled in price in the past dozen years.

While the burning of natural gas results in the emission of carbon dioxide, the burning of coal results in the emission of sulfur dioxide, ash particulates, mercury, and twice the carbon dioxide of coal. The reduction of these emissions requires rather expensive add-ons to a coal unit.

The Grand River Dam Author-ity is facing this issue at this time. The agency operates 1,000 mw of coal generation from two plants at its coal-fi red complex near Pryor. The two units were fi nished in 1982 and 1986. For years, they were among the lowest cost power plants in the nation. Today, the cost of fuel at the plants is a bit more than the price for electric generation with natural gas.

PSO and OGE face similar choices. PSO also has two coal plants. They will spend $350 mil-lion to upgrade one unit which it will retire in 2026 while shut-

ting down the other unit by 2016. PSO will replace the energy it will lose from shuttering one plant by buying gas-fi red generation from the Oneta generation plant near Wagoner. One interesting note is that GRDA was slated to buy the Oneta plant in 2005 but lost out on the opportunity when the owner declared bankruptcy.

For GRDA, which has power sales to Western Farmers Electric Cooperative and to OMPA, the decisions are signifi cant. Engi-neering studies done by the fi rm of Black & Veatch indicate that upgrade of both coal units would cost about $550 million. That is not a bad number as it comes to about $570 per kw of output for the upgrades which would give the plants 20 years or more of life extension. That compares to the more than $900 per kw the upgrades PSO is planning it will take.

There is risk in this action. Coal could continue to be more expen-sive than natural gas, and coal plants risk having to comply with carbon dioxide emissions stan-dards in the future.

The alternative is natural gas generation. A new natural gas combined cycle generation unit costs $1,100 per kw of capacity or twice the cost of a coal plant upgrade. So there is the option of switching to natural gas, the op-tion of staying with coal, or the op-tion of splitting the difference and

keeping one coal unit and building one new gas plant to replace the coal unit not upgraded.

Without taking into consider-ation that we need more genera-tion to meet growth, the option costs are: 1,000 mw of new gas to replace the coal at $1.2 billion, or 500 mw of natural gas com-bined cycle and upgrade one coal plant at $820 million, or upgrade two coal plants at $560 million.

If the cost of capital outlay were the only consideration, that might be an easy choice. But coal delivery costs have doubled in a dozen years, too. This has been primarily due to hikes in railroad freight fees. Is it likely that we would go into another period of fl at or reduced rail costs as we saw from 1988 through 1998? Is it possible that negotiations for new fees could provide some cost relief? After all, the railroads get up to $400,000 per day for coal delivery to a two-unit plant.

But the cost of plant upgrade is the fi rst part of the equation. The

Teresa Axton(405) 707-3442

(800) 324-0781 ext. [email protected]

123 W. 7th, Suite 300 P.O. Box 1448Fax: (888) 707-3440 Stillwater, OK 74076

CBSA Credit Bureau Services AssociationCollections • Reporting • Consulting • Outsourcing

www.cbsasolutions.com

Powerful Transformer Solutions

Heath FunstonTerritory Manager

[email protected]

Ext. 193

www.solomoncorp.com

Cell: 785-280-0996 103 W. Main • P.O. Box 245

Solomon, Kansas 67480FAX 785-655-2502

1-800-234-2867


SALES & SERVICE, INC.

TERRY RIGGLE KAREN RIGGLE

401 INDUSTRIAL DRIVEDUNCAN, OK 73533

AMR RETROFITS

WATTHOUR METER CALIBRATION REPAIRS

(580) 255-6567CELL (580) 467-1270

(see COAL OR GAS, page10)

cost of a plant affects the demand rate as demand is a function of capital outlay. The cost of fuel is the energy fee or kwh fee on your power bill. During the past year, coal has cost about 25 mills (2.5 cents) per kwh for generation fuel. Natural gas has been closer to 19 mills per kwh this past year, although it is about 23 mills as this is written. A three-mill differential is $75,000 per day in savings. But the downside to natural gas is the wide swings in cost of gas.

In this past year, gas has increased from its low by 60%. That’s a monster change in cost. And while gas has been less costly, gas needs rise by little more than 15% to make coal a less costly fuel than natural gas.

In this instance, history offers no help in decision making. In 2006, OGE, PSO, and OMPA were work-ing very hard to get approvals to build a new large coal-fi red plant near the OGE Sooner Station south of Ponca City. The land, rail access, gas pipelines, transmission lines, and all needed infrastructure for a coal unit were already in place. Coal was half the cost of natural gas as a boiler fuel. This was the way to go. The plant was to be called the Red Rock Power Plant. But Red Rock did not happen. OGE as the major owner wanted rate relief, hikes, immedi-ately to help pay for the plant while under construc-tion. The Oklahoma Corporation Commission refused to approve the action so OGE cancelled plans for the plant. The cancellation caused great disappointment for many MESO members in the area who saw the plant as a great addition to the economy.

Without Red Rock, OGE decided to acquire the Redbud natural gas generation station near Edmond. OGE contacted GRDA to see if it would want to be a partner. GRDA said it would be interested, and OMPA later became a partner in the plant as well. The owners of Redbud had gambled that this huge generation unit with no dedicated customers would become valuable. With the cancellation of Red Rock, this did happen. The owners reaped a fortune since the cost to build Redbud was under $550 per kw in 2000, and the new owners picked it up for less than

this amount. They were then able to sell Redbud to the utilities for over $800 per kw of capacity.

Had Red Rock been approved, we do not know what the end cost would have been. Coal plant con-struction increased by more than 10% per year so a fi nal cost of $1,700 per kw of capacity is quite likely and probably low. That cost is one third less than the cost of a new coal unit today.

OMPA took a 13% interest in Redbud, GRDA took a 34% interest, OGE owns 51% and is the opera-tor of the plant. The plant acquisition cost was $852 million. The same capacity built at that time as a coal plant would have been nearly $2 billion, and the fuel cost for the plant would have been similar to or higher than the cost of gas today. Red Rock, if built, would have been a short-term competitive disaster for the owners in my view.

The point is that in the short term, we in the utility industry thought that a new coal plant was easily the


Coal or Gas(continued from page 9)

(continues to next page)

best decision that could be made in 2006. And that decision, in retrospect, would have been very wrong but only insofar as we are measuring by today’s stan-dards. Check back with me in fi ve years because the hindsight could easily change.

Today, it seems that choosing natural gas may be the best course of action. That’s why when utilities do decision making, they normally have their engi-neers do “sensitivity analysis” in order to try best to determine what the best course may be if variables change. The most used sensitivity is what happens to cost if natural gas prices rise.

However, other variables come into play includ-ing environment, interest rates, and politics, and the effects on the overall economy of Oklahoma. Okla-homa is a gas producing state. Shelving coal plants means dollars generated in Oklahoma do not go to railroads and coal companies. They go to companies owning gas production in Oklahoma. While most stock in our gas companies is owned by out-of-state interests, utilities help the local gas industry by using gas rather than coal. This fact is best illustrated by

the action of the Oklahoma legislature which states that Oklahoma will meet its electric energy needs through use of gas, wind, and conservation. New coal units need not apply. The legislation does not stop upgrade of existing units.

Another part of the puzzle is competitive position. No utility wants to be placed in a position where its costs of energy will be higher than the neighboring utility. So when GRDA’s board of directors meets with staff to discuss which direction to go with their deci-sion on generation for the future, they also have to consider whether spending $1 billion instead of $500 million will be a competitive problem.

A fi nal piece of the puzzle is the question of fuel switching capability. In 2026 when other utilities no longer have coal plants, would there be an advan-tage for a utility in having both fuels available for generation in order to choose the lower cost genera-tion option? The answer is yes but. Yes, but what if there are new regulations on carbon dioxide? CO2 capture is expensive. Choosing coal leaves you open to that cost which is a very big IF.

So having a crystal ball that predicts gas prices, coal prices, court decisions related to environment,


EPA regulations, which party controls the senate, interest rates, and load growth would be very handy in the next year. That goes for every electric utility in Oklahoma. All have to face these questions. PSO has settled on a strategy. By 2016, only about 15% of their energy will come from coal.

The above would cause some really serious wor-ries about natural gas prices if so much gas were not being discovered so often. In 2001 we in the utility industry were dead certain that we had to have a major pipeline from Alaska to bring gas to the lower forty-eight states. Sara Palin in 2007 pointed to initial efforts to plan a gas pipeline as her highest achieve-ment as governor of Alaska. Today, a gas pipeline to take the huge amounts of gas in Alaska and neigh-boring Canada to the port at Valdez are still alive. But the gas would be sent to Japan and Asia where the price is much better and where it is needed. The cost to transport gas from Alaska to the lower forty eight is way higher than the total cost of delivered gas today.

The Gulf of Mexico was the featured area for new gas discoveries in 2001. About 65% of our gas came out of the Gulf. The Gulf held huge reserves that would be expensive to get to, and many of those reserves were off the coast of Florida where Florida legislators had a big Keep Off sign. There is not much activity in the Gulf today nor is there political debate about opening more areas for gas drilling. Tons of areas in the Gulf are available, but with huge new gas fi nds happening so often on land, why go off shore?

Similarly, there is a 300 year supply of coal in Wyoming and Montana. Whichever way we decide to go in regard to power supply, we have not had a time in over 40 years when the supply of fuel was so available. That being the case, there may not be a wrong answer as to how we go forward with new or updated generation. But MESO members have to be ready for added costs in the future. Oklahoma utilities will spend about $2 billion in the next seven years on infrastructure. In the past the rate shock from such in-vestments would have been huge. Low interest rates, if they continue, will alleviate the rate shock. In fact,

GRDA might be able to spend $600 million on plant upgrades and still be able to lower demand rates in 2015 thanks to the miracle of low interest rates.

GRDA will retire 1986 era bonds with higher rates in 2014. Those bonds built the coal- fi red complex and the transmission needed to deliver power from the complex to cities and co-ops. The upgrades of the complex will cost as much or more than the origi-nal construction cost of the plants, but payments will be a bit more than half as much on the same amount of principal. But GRDA might need to spend over $1 billion.

The point is, there will be decisions to be made that will affect us for the next 30 years, and there’s no clear knowledge of the best path to take. Although I think having some coal capacity is a good idea, I could be very wrong.

I opened this rather long article on the thinking behind the Red Rock power plant. I’ll close by noting that in 1984, the Oklaunion power plant was con-sidered a great buy. A few years later, the high cost of rail service made the plant a bit of an albatross. Then the ERCOT market in Texas made it a great investment, so great that utilities were suing each other over who might get a piece of the plant when a portion of it became available. Now, the plant has the same issues of other coal-fi red units.

I’m confi dent the decisions that will be made will work out in the long term. It’s easy to second guess in the short term. The boards of our agencies can only take the best information provided and make the decision on future generation. The good part about that is, they are our boards.

Coal or Gas (continued from preceding page)

LOW COST DRUG / ALCOHOL TESTING

Call MESO, 1-800-636-MESO,

for quotes and information on joining the Local Government Testing Consortium.


PRESRT STDU.S. POSTAGE

PAIDOKLAHOMA CITY OK

PERMIT NO. 628

Municipal Electric Systems of Oklahoma308 N.E. 27th StreetOklahoma City, OK 73105-2717

oklahoma public power - oklahoma municipal...

Documents