HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-HDPC-1988-07-14 . . , . - . . -, . . . ♦ .. t : l._1 .:..t:..ti.:\...1J.\wti la a..i.\J. wi. l ..i,1:\ ".\ ' ♦ a ♦ . ♦ _ . . . ♦ ♦ _♦ _ ♦ .. . .. . ♦ ♦ . _ ♦ _. t _ t ♦ _.
♦
. _ . . . a. ... _. ♦ \._ a a r . .` a .. a : vt. .'.+ ` l . ? . . a . t . . . , . . . ♦ . . . C . C .._C J.0 t \�.\ . .1 . ♦ . `. . . 1 . . , .. ti . ,. 1 . . . .. . . . .. . . . , . . .. ..
MINUTES
Hydropower Commission
July 14 , 1988
7 : 30 p . m .
Common Council Chambers
------- - - ---- - - --- - - ---- --- --------- ------ -- --- -- - - -- - --- --- -----
PRESENT : Edward Brothers , Harold Craft , Cathy Emilian , Daniel
Hoffman , Helen Jones , Elizabeth Mulholland , Martin
Sampson , Alex Skutt , Michael Sprague , David Stewart ,
Mark Walker
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Daniel Hoffman at
7 : 35 p . m . Members of the Hydropower Commission introduced
themselves and stated their representative constituencies .
Minutes of the previous meeting had not been received by
Commission members .
Chairman ' s Report
Chairman Hoffman reported on recent action by the City Council
and other developments since the last Commission meeting :
1 . Matt McHugh ' s off ice indicated that it was now too late to
put into effect legislation preventing the Federal Regulatory
Commission from issuing licenses for hydropower development at
Ithaca Falls or other local sites . He indicated that it could be
done next year , but i s too late for this legislative session .
The resolution , which had been placed backon Council agenda
because Alderman Killeen indicated willingness to support it , is
now table =d because it will not be in effect before referendum .
2 . The request for a two — year extension of the Commission ' s
license , which currently requires that construction begin by
October 1989 ,` was passed at the Council level .
3 . The City Council allocated funds to reopen the fishery study
at Ithaca Falls , and for the following three studies required by
the Federal Regulatory Commission to maintain licenses for Ithaca
Falls and Six Mile Creek :
a . The emergency action plan , a computerized model of what
would happen if the dam above Ithaca Falls were to fail during a
flood ( estimated bid : $ 14 , 600 ) .
b . The erosion and sedimentation plan , which explains how
to minimize erosion and sedimentation during construction and
operation of hydropower plant ( est . bid : $ 81800 ) .
Ce Inspection according to federal standards of the 60 foot
dam on Six Mile Creek ( est . cost : $ 10 , 000 ) .
4 . The Council did not allocate funds for the Commission to hire
a consultant to update engineering information or to hire a
consultant to advise the Commission on the latest economic
developments related to sale of electricity . The Council wanted
. . . . . . . . . . . . P . I . . . . ,
Hydropower Commission 2
Minutes - 7 / 14 / 88
to know what could be done " in house " or to get lower bids on the
consultants .
Questions were raised regarding the Council ' s objection to hiring
consultants . Discussion of possible objections included cost of
hiring consultants ( over $ 25 , 000 ) , and the Council not being
properly informed about the hydropower situation . Chairman
Hoffman expressed hope to better inform the council before their
next meeting ( on the first Wednesday in August ) . The consultants
are necessary to provide up - to - date figures and information , as
the situation changes rapidly , and to inform the public of costs .
In addition , the minimum flow has been raised by Federal agency
from 30 cubic feet / second to 60 cubic feet / second , and this may
effect plant design and energy production .
Committee Reports
1 . Economic Committee ( Mark Walker )
Recommend that Commission continue with consultants now in use
rather than seeking new consultants , as any new estimates will be
based on Halliwell ' s original figures and would be repetitive .
Mr . Walker asked Tom Sullivan at Stetson - Harza to estimate cost
and design as compared with original estimates from Halliwell . A
pre - feasibility study showed that Halliwell cost and design
estimate is fairly accurate , but inadequate regarding cost to
City to maintain control over ; site . Without actual bid , he was
not sure what City and Common Council can do to sharpen
estimates - - there is room for further work in terms of looking at
original data and seeing how closely Halliwell did their
analysis .
2 . Environmental Issues ( Elizabeth Mulholland & Edward Brothers )
A formal written report has been given to the Common Council ,
based on information discussed at previous Commission meeting .
Bob Wesley , who did the original survey , is interested in doing
an update examination of the site in view of the probable change
in conditions over the last two or three years . The Chairman
agreed that this may be added to the Commission ' s agenda .
The Chairman expressed concern raised at the council meeting
regarding the value of re - opening the fishery study , especially
the relationship of the low water flow this year . Mr . Brothers
stated the importance of documenting how the fishery has changed
over the last three years , and added that the low water flow this
year won ' t affect fish population from last two or three years .
The study will consist of a formalized interview survey and will
attempt to get commitments from DEC as to what their plans are
for the site .
3 . Legal Issues Committee - Absent ( Ellen Harrison , Therese
Araneo )
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . a a . . . a . v < , . c c a a , ta , ♦ a a i a c . a . r . . . . . ) a to ) a isN % NC 111f 1r 'it 44 '14la la} al lltit4a 4a4 1 \ 74 i \ 5 1 t \ \ t 5 aat
Hydropower Commission 3
Minutes — 7 / 14 / 88
4 . Public Involvement Committee ( Dan Hoffman , Ellen Harrison ,
Martin Sampson )
There will be a travelling display set up on the Commons and at
other sites in Ithaca describing the city ' s ' involvement with
hydropower , with panels explaining issues that will be on
referendum . The display should be ready for use this Fall .
Concern was expressed by Mr . Walker regarding the actual cost
estimate appearing on ballot . The Legal Committee will be
responsible for attaching a cost estimate to the question that
appears on the ballot . The city will then be authorized to spend
that amount on the plant . If the actual cost exceeds the
authorized amount , then the issue would possibly have to go back
for a second referendum . The actual question that will appear on
the ballot has not yet been composed .
Discussion with Cornell Representatives
The public was invited to hear David Stewart , Director of
Community Relations at Cornell University , and Harold Craft of
Cornell present the university ' s thoughts on hydropower and to
answer questions regarding Cornell ' s involvement . David Stewart
read aloud a letter he sent to Dan Hoffman after meeting with
members of the Commission last month . The letter answers several
questions raised at the meeting and expresses Cornell ' s views on
the hydropower plant and the use of ` Fall Creek to produce
electricity for the university ' s East Hill Campus ( see attached ) .
Cornell sees no economic advantage to constructing a hydropower
plant on Fall Creek at Ithaca Falls at this time .
Mr . Stewart and Mr . Kraft then answered questions from Chairman
Hoffman regarding cooperation between the city and Cornell if the
referendum is passed in November . He also brought up issues
involving public accessibility to the plant , and the possibility
of the university purchasing electricity from the plant .
Cornell ' s response was that they would consider a joint venture ,
considering the various options regarding construction and buying
if the referendum is approved .
power from the plant ,
Additional questions were raised by members of the Commission
regarding interaction of the existing Cornell plant at Beebe Lake
with the proposed plant , . specifically water levels in Beebe Lake
and flow over the falls . Cornell responded that technical
cooperation between the two plants in regard to water flow may
have to be considered . Further discussion centered on Cornell ' s
minimum f low / plant factor of 33 % , considerably lower than the
federally recommended level of 50 to 607x , which the city is
required to meet .
Hydropower Commission
Minutes — 7 / 14 / 88
Cornell agreed to share insights from its economic analysis with
the city . Mr . Kraft expressed the opinion that cost would
determine whether or not private investors would be interested
in building a hydropower plant at the Falls .
Both Cornell and members of the Commission agreed that the site
is a potential source of clean power , and will at some point be
developed . There is no current financial incentive for private
companies to do so . However , one private company , Synergics , has
expressed interest in developing the site .
Questions from the media and * pub 1 is focused on Corne 1 1 ' s
intentions as regards minimizing its use of energy , future
economic advantage of building the plant , and meeting minimum
federal requirements . If a private company was to be granted a
license to develop the site , Cornell would be concerned about
maintaining access to the fishing area and also their land
rights . The land Cornell owns surrounding fall creek would be
part of the negotiations with the city if a joint venture was
decided upon between the c i ty and Corne 1 1 . Cornell would agree
to do a study along with the developers of the site as regards
cost of power produced by plant .
A member of audience expressed concern about salmon fishing at
the base of the falls . It would be of fected if the f low was
reduced to an " August trickle " year round , because periodic
flooding is necessary to salmon spawning habits . Mr . Brothers
responded by saying that a f low of 60 CFS is maintained during
the summer ; if a plant is built , the capacity for the average
flow will be 300 - 400 CFS .
To illustrate the change of water f low over Ithaca Fa 1 1 s , Mr .
Brothers presented slides showing water flowing over the Falls at
levels ranging from 35 CFS to 1400 CFS - at 10 ft . intervals .
Commission Update
Helen Jones updated the commission on the latest proposals from
the economic and engineering consultants . There are now only two
engineering companies involved in the pro ject , since a third
company would complicate matters . Ms . Jones expects to have the
amended scope of f igures from the two companies by Friday of
this week , and the updated information from consultants by July
28th .
In addition , Ms . Jones stated four key facts that need to be
included in the wording of the referendum :
1 . Method of constructing or acquiring the plant
2 . Maximum cost
J
. . . .:. •. . .. : ::. t. . •. _ t _ i. _ , : :. t -' t2a1_t_l`.t_.t_t. is.::.r` _a..,i ..:.+ :3.a.1 ._: i> i:5 . t- . . . 5 . .. : . � :. . :` : _ . . . . . . . . .. . . . . :. : , . t : tt :A .`a :.t :. t . . t . . . . t .a.`. . .. . 1 t __ . . . } . _` ... , . _ t . . .. . 1 . . .. _ . _ ._ .._ ._.� a_. ti � i ,:
Hydropower Commission 5
Minutes — 7 / 14 / 88
3 . Estimated cost
4 . Method of furnishing the service
In order for the ballot to be discussed at the September 7th
meeting of the Common Council , the revisionary work should be
done within the next few weeks . A 10 day notice is required
prior to the public hearing . The ballot should then be ready and
presented to the Mayor by October 3rd .
The Chairman added that the Commission should be ready to make a
recommendation to the Charter and Ordinance Committee Meeting on
August 18th .
Next. Meeting
The next meeting date of the Hydropower Commission was left
undecided . The - Chairman will notify members of the Commission
when a date has been set .
The meeting was adjourned at 9 . 15 p . m .
0 - Hydro - M i nut e s
: *:a a 0 - : Cornell UmversiLty Uruversi ' Relations
� 110 Day Hall
..
. iu+aim % Ithaca, NY 14853-2801
-
0s loft
(607) 255-4908
July 14 , 1988
Daniel L . Hoffman , Chairman
Ithaca Hydropower Commission
City Hall
108 East Green Street
Ithaca , NY 14850
Dear Dan :
I welcome this opportunity to discuss Cornell U s ty s vniver1 l ews regarding
i•
n
ghydropower , particularly as they relate to Fall Creek in the City of . Ithac
a .
As you know , for several years the univ .
regarding h ersity has considered the various o tons
• 9 g ydropower and the use of Fall Creek to produce P
Hill campus . We bel eve P ce electr � c � ty for the East
e that , given global environmentalroblems
p t hydropower
presents a clean , safe , renewable
source of energy . At the same time , an
discussion about pursuing hydropower at Fall y
construction P Creek would also depend on whether the
of such a plant would be economical ) advantageous ,
ageous .
Last month , when Ellen Harrison , Helen Jones •
Burnes and me and you met with Vice President John
• me , rased several technical and policy - related quest *
discussion confirms that the cit also • q tions . That
hydropower . y o faces some d * ff * cult choices with regard g to
Based on the most recent analysis conducted •
no clear a by our staff , Cornell Un � vers � t sees
conomoc advantage to constructing a hydropower y
Ithaca Falls at this to plant on Fall Creek at
e . This was not necessarily the case earlier '
at the time the university and the cit � n the decade
Ener Re submitted their proposals to the Federal
9y gulatory CommComm � ss � on . However , even ossa •
hydropower , we feel g Possible changes � n the economics of
P � el strongly that it would not be prudent to '
options related to this clean , p eliminate all future
an , renewable source of energy . Although the economics
of a • . hydropower plant do nota ear to be g mics .
oss � b � lit PP . viable � n 1988 , we intend to keep the
P • y of generat * ng electricwty through a h dro s
tion for the future . g y power plant under cons
the city should choose not to proceed w '
universit d P with its own hydropower plant , the
y does not to proceed with its own last solei
developer from obtainin a hydropower p y to prevent a private
to r 9 y power license . Should a private developer de
proceed , the university , of course would b P cede
submitted to FERC , a an active reviewer of proposals
Several city officials have asked us about •
between the the poss � bil1ty of a point venture
city and Cornell . We would be willin to cons *
Again , the governingissue g sider such a poss � b � l � tye
s would be as described earlier .
- more -
� age 2 - Hoffman 7 / 14 / 88
At our meeting last month , you also asked '
Y about minimum flow levels . Our proposal
to the federal government met FERC approval . Thos is P P
PP a moot issue , . because the
university is not planning to construct the * Cornell could
plant at this time .
consider a higher minimum flow over the falls if the unix '
consider buildin a 1 ers � ty ever were to
• g plant in the near future , recognizing that the city ' s r
calls for a minimum flow of approximately 6 Y proposal
PP y 0 cubic feet per second , while the
univers � ty s proposal was for about 32 cubic feet per second . '
plant could be construct P . We believe that a
ed so that a satisfactory s factory d i version of water doesn
detract from the beauty of Ithaca Falls . of
Regarding another question that you raised •
• y ised during our recent meet * ng , Cornell
Univers * ty s 1982 proposal for hydropower , which has •
several ear s been on file � n City Hall for
years , provides for continued public access to the f '
of the falls including fishing area at the base
a footbridge overtthe tailrace . This is con •
the revocable agreement previously consistent with
P y reached with the city .
You also inquired as to whether t '
here is any need for technical interaction
between the university ' s existinghydropower 1
p ant above Ithaca Falls and a
proposed hydropower plant at the base of the falls . Our
that there is none ,• u technical people tell me
the two would operate independently .
Y
Another of your questions dealt withi• water and property rights . Cornell owns
substant1ai water r •1ghts 1n addition to some of the •
Ithaca Fall land and access rights at
• s . Also , a majority of the land where a possible
located is owned -b P ble power plant would be
y the university ,
vers i ty .
To conclude : no Cornell has r
• p esent plans to develop a hydropowerlant at Ithaca
Falls . If the university were to develo
meet al . a h P a
P : hydropower project , we would want it to
1 federal requirements and be economically advantageous . Given
r . en
uncertainties in
predicting future energy costs and the advantages
from a global environmental of hydropower
• perspective , we think n k i t would be a mistake
actions that preclude oss � ble take to take any
• p future hydropower developments in Ithaca .
information is consistent with the o This
position the university has provided the city
for some time , tY
If you need further informati •
on , do not hesitate to contact me .
so
nce e -1 y ,
David I . Stewart ,
Director of Community Relations and
Assistant to the Vice President
cc : John F . 6urness
Harold D . Craft , Jr .
/ rmf