02: Please supply any comments related to the Study Scoping Process section (3).




Feb. 2, 2024, 2:23 p.m.
SACHI BEGUR | Puget Sou…
No response submitted.

Jan. 31, 2024, 4:23 p.m.
ADAM MORSE | BPA
No response submitted.

Feb. 2, 2024, 8:54 a.m.
JOHN CRIDER | EWEB

The BPM states that the PO will provide the Board and RAPC an opportunity to review the Study Scope document, but does not discuss what the process would be if the Board or RAPC objected to something in the Study Scope and wanted the PO to adjust.

Does the Study Scope require approval or acceptance by either the Board or RAPC, or both?


Feb. 2, 2024, 9:33 a.m.
JOHN MAYHEW | Public Se…
No response submitted.

Feb. 2, 2024, 11:56 a.m.
RAJ HUNDAL | PWX
No response submitted.

Feb. 2, 2024, 2:12 p.m.
TYLER MOORE | Arizona P…

APS suggests that we define the “timely opportunity” better for the Board and RAPC review of the LOLE Study Scope. Previously, it has worked well to have the RAPC informed at a meeting and then final scope decided at subsequent meeting.


Feb. 2, 2024, 3:34 p.m.
NICOLE BLACKWELL | Idaho Pow…
No response submitted.

Feb. 2, 2024, 4:27 p.m.
JERRET FISCHER | SRP

SRP appreciates the structured approach of the Study Scoping Process. SRP recommends the WPP clarify how the Board of Directors and RAPC comments are considered in the scoping process. This may improve transparency in the scoping process.