To Fort Collins City Council –
The Organic Contract and Power Supply Agreement between Platte River Power Authority (PRPA) and the four owner communities is being considered for revision. It is imperative that you NOT approve the currently proposed changes until more time is taken to review and revise them. The last time this contract was up for renewal, there were many months of discussions and careful consideration before approval. At this current opportunity, we should be adding and retaining provisions that benefit Fort Collins (and the other municipalities). Instead of approving the changes on September 16, please postpone the vote and allow time to make the following modifications:
The proposed duration should be no longer than 20 years.
The current proposed language states a 50 year duration for the contract. Given the rapid changes happening in the energy sector today, 50 years is far too long. Although revisions have taken place more frequently than the stated duration of the contract since its inception, a shorter term would guarantee that all parties agree to review the terms with reasonable frequency.
The contract should allow for off-site virtual net-metering.
The Colorado Legislature passed SB21-261 in 2021, allowing off-site Virtual Net Metering, which applies to utilities regulated by the PUC. The University of Denver, University of Colorado and the portion of CSU that is in Xcel territory have jumped on this opportunity to expand their renewable energy. PRPA is exempt from this legislation because they are not currently regulated by the PUC. So, in order to provide equal protection and opportunities to PRPA customers, this Organic Contract and Power Supply Agreement between the cities and PRPA should include the same provisions. As an example, CSU would likely buy far more solar if they could get an equal off-site Virtual net metering agreement with PRPA. That would help CSU reach their renewable energy goals and decrease our local climate and air pollution.
It is critical that Prosumers ( i.e., those who both produce and consume energy, also known as self-generators) retain ownership of, and rights to energy they produce behind the meter.
As currently written, PRPA’s Virtual Power Plant (VPP) plan takes the Distributed Energy Resources value stack from Prosumers and can sell it on the Southwest Power Pool wholesale market for PRPA’s own benefit, without full compensation for the Prosumer. Starting in July 2026, XCEL Prosumers, just outside of the Fort Collins Utilities service territory, will be able to join a third party VPP earning performance based compensation for power, capacity, ancillary services and wires deferrals. Prosumer rights include Access Rights, Extraction Rights, Usage Rights, Transfer Rights, and Exclusion Rights. Prosumers own the sunlight that strikes their property, and must not be forced to relinquish those ownership rights to PRPA. Please know that it would be a huge mistake to allow PRPA to take ownership of what we do behind our meters, and the contract must be modified to protect Prosumer rights.
Remove or substantially increase the 1% cap on city generation and do away with the TRU-UP costs that PRPA adds to the cost of city self-generated electricity. Although the city is not currently near the proposed 1% cap, a true commitment to, and pursuit of, 100% non-carbon energy on the part of Fort Collins could be aided by increasing this cap. It is apparent that PRPA’s own “non-carbon energy goal” is not taken seriously by PRPA. In addition to their current gas Combustion Turbines, they are planning to spend $350 million to build new gas generation which will continue to pollute for decades. If Fort Collins is required to buy 99% of their power from PRPA, which will be using fossil-fueled generation, Fort Collins will be prevented from reaching its own goal of 100% non-fossil fuel energy. Even though net-metered energy generation doesn’t count toward the 1%, it’s unlikely that net-metered generation alone will be enough to reach the city’s goals. Despite the fact that PRPA is not fulfilling its own non-carbon pledge, Fort Collins still can through Power Purchase Agreements on the distribution system without additional costs and limitations. Fort Collins has been limited in its Solar Power Purchase Program (SP3) because of the Tru-up costs PRPA imposes on distribution level solar generation. Those costs should be eliminated. Fort Collins Utilities could purchase inexpensive solar and wind (like CSU, the City and County of Denver, and Holy Cross do) on the distribution level. Fort Collins should not be restricted by its contract with PRPA in producing as much renewable energy as we can to reach our 100% RE goals.
The purchase of unbundled RECs (renewable energy certificates) should be prohibited in the Organic Contract.
The purchase of RECs is used to artificially inflate the percentage of energy generation that is non-carbon. Buying RECs does nothing to resolve the poor air quality along the front range and is just greenwashing, a way of lying to the public about achieving goals that are not actually being achieved. Instead of buying RECs, PRPA (and Fort Collins utilities for that matter) should use those funds to develop its own renewables and storage. Purchase of unbundled RECs to “achieve” 100% renewable energy was never the intent of the Resource Diversification Plan. Although PRPA states that their contract for RECs ends this year and will not be renewed, the prohibition should be written into the contract so that purchase of RECs will not be considered in the future.
The language that specifies development of renewable energy should be retained. In section 2.1 Purposes, section ii, the part that defines renewable energy activities has been stricken in the proposed revision. And section 2.2 under Functions, Services, and Facilities, sections v and vi are revised and a portion is eliminated, that which specifies that “environmental responsibility” requires building new renewable energy. PRPA seems to want to be “environmentally responsible” without being required to develop renewable energy. While PRPA may think that burning gas instead of coal is good enough to count as “environmentally responsible”, that is not what Fort Collins or PRPA themselves have stated to be their goal. Indeed, PRPA is installing and purchasing some renewables, but not at the speed and scale that conditions call for. It makes sense to retain specifically stated requirements that they must continue to develop (solely) renewable energy and distributed energy. This may seem like merely semantics, but clarity is important.
Since PRPA is not currently under PUC regulation, the city councils of the four municipalities must serve as the bodies to regulate the utility and protect the consumers.
While the PUC employs energy, pollution, climate and economic experts to review contracts and impose reasonable terms, that huge responsibility falls to you, the city council members. In fulfilling this responsibility, you cannot rely on the PRPA board members to assist you, since the contract requires them to protect the interests of PRPA and not the residents of their municipalities. The interests of PRPA do not always align with the interests of the municipalities. It would be malfeasance to approve the contract changes without vigorous (independent) review and consideration, and the people who live in Fort Collins could suffer as a result.
Fort Collins (and the other municipalities) should not be restricted in who they appoint to the PRPA Board.
Given the complexity of energy, it is imperative to have qualified persons serving on the board. PVREA, Holy Cross and United Power elect their board members. PRPA should also, but at minimum, the contract certainly shouldn’t restrict Fort Collins from appointing persons who can best serve ratepayers.
There should be an agreement in the Organic Contract to restrict the use of carbon resources on high ozone days.
Fort Collins is rated the thirteenth worst city in the nation for ozone and given a grade of F by the American Lung Association. Ozone is like sandpaper on people’s lungs and causes serious health effects like asthma and cardiovascular disease. It has been requested by both the Board of County Commissioners and the Regional Air Quality Council that PRPA not run carbon resources, beyond what is needed for the member communities, during high ozone seasons. The City Council needs to protect the residents of Fort Collins from poor air quality by requiring this in the Organic Contract.
At this opportunity to revise the organic contract and power supply agreement, please take steps to make sure that the interests of the residents of Fort Collins are protected. The contract must encourage the swift transition to renewable energy, not eliminate the only mention of it. In this time of escalating air pollution and climate crisis, we all need to do everything we can to eliminate greenhouse gas emissions. Don’t let a flawed contract with PRPA stand in our way.
Thank you,
FORT COLLINS SUSTAINABILITY GROUP
Barbara Krupnik-Goldman (Steering Committee Member)
________________________________________________
October 8th Update:
At the Council meeting on October 7th, Barbara Krupnik-Goldman made the additional comments that follow. Afterward, City Council approved the contract unanimously without amendment.
________________________________________________
Following the council meeting on September 16, Rick Casey and I had a meeting with council member Ohlson and Tyler Marr on Sept. 25 to follow up on questions and discussion raised during the council meeting.
One of the items we addressed was a request made by the NCP4CE at the county land use hearing, and reiterated in a recent letter sent to you all regarding the contract and PSA. That request is that on high ozone days, a restriction should be put on Platte River to NOT burn gas beyond what might be needed to meet the needs of the 4 owner communities. The response to that has been that when PRPA enters the SPP, their assets will be controlled by the SPP, and they will not be able to decline burning the gas if it is called upon. However, we have been told by SPP administrators that exceptions or limitations are allowed. Given the contradiction, Mr. Marr agreed that he would follow up with the SPP to get clarification.
In your council packet there is an agenda item summary, written by Mr. Marr. He states on the 2nd page, in response to this item, “It is wrong to assume that something else can fill in if Platte River turns off the turbines; Platte River cannot just turn on more wind or solar so either the load gets dumped (a blackout) or the burden shifts to some other resources, likely less efficient with higher emissions.”
First of all, our request has always been, that on high ozone days, a restriction should be placed on burning gas beyond what might be needed to meet the needs of the 4 owner communities. No one is advocating for a blackout.
We are saying that if there is a demand for power beyond our load, to be sold on the market, that that power should come from another area that does not have our poor air quality. Yes, the burden should shift to some other resources.
There is no definitive response from the SPP in Mr. Marr’s summary regarding an exception to calling upon Platte River’s gas turbines, when doing so would exacerbate our ozone pollution.
I would like this council to get a definitive answer from the SPP, and if such restrictions are allowed, the restriction should be required in the contract or PSA.
