COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. __6e__ Page 3 of 3
Meeting Date: June 23, 2020
Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).
(1) Possible choice of power supply characteristics
Cons:
(1) Higher unit cost for equivalent clean resources
(2) Limited market interest in small, one-year power contract
(3) Requires rapid development and release of RFP and contract negotiations, exercising
outside legal support.
(4) Requires additional Port staff time to manage multiple contracts and hourly
forecasting.
This is not the recommended alternative.
Alternative 2 – Execute a 3 aMW power contract with BPA.
Cost Implications: $1,000,000
Pros:
(1) Provides reliable, clean power at competitive firm fixed price rates.
(2) Single entity (BPA) providing power supply, transmission and ancillary services rather
than coordinating through multiple parties
(3) Working directly with BPA for this limited portion of the Airport power supply is more
efficient and at lower cost than engaging through another counter-party.
Cons:
(1) Administrative effort will be required to forecast hourly power requirements for one-
year period.
This is the recommended alternative.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Annual Budget Status and Source of Funds
The cost under this contract are included in the annual operating budget. The approved 2020
operating expense budget included the electrical supply in amount of $7,649,972. This
authorization for approximately 15% of the Airport power supply lies within the budgeted
amount. The funding source would be the Airport Development Fund.
ATTACHMENTS TO THIS REQUEST
(1) Presentation slides
PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTIONS OR BRIEFINGS
None