presentation to standard & poorsguampowerauthority.com/gpa_authority/investors/...leac modeling...

1

Presentation to Standard & Poors

Guam Power AuthorityJune 6, 2007

APPENDICES

2

List of Appendices

GPA Organizational ChartIndustry IssuesInstitutionalized PlanningGPA Strategic PlanQuality Management PlansOperations Information and PerformanceEconomy (GPA Forecast)GPA Demographics

3

Organizational Chart

4

Industry Issues

5

Retirements and Labor Pool Development

200 Technical and Professional Employees eligible to retire within five yearsIndustry-wide shortage of skilled trades and Power Engineers

6

Apprenticeship Program

U.S. Department of Labor certified skilled trades apprenticeship programProgram kicked-off 1st Cycle in Feb. 2004 and the 2nd

Cycle in Oct. 2004Total of 40 Apprentices on board for T&D and Generation positions

Electric Meter Repairer, Electrician (Substation), Instrument Technician, Lineman, Power Plant Operator (Steam Power Plant), Relay Technician

Academic classes and on-the-job training are required to successfully complete program.Program is 3 or 4 years (depending on positions) for apprentices with no qualified transferable OJT or classes.Anticipate 6 graduates in FY 2007.

7

Institutionalized Planning

Responsibility for System Planning is divided among SPORD and Engineering

8

Strategic Planning and Operations Research Division (SPORD) Planning Responsibilities

Strategic PlanningForecastingLong Range Transmission PlanningIntegrated Resource PlanningLEAC modeling and analysisQuality Management PlanningGrid Operations Planning (Future Responsibility)

Business GAP AnalysisPerformance Management Contract PlanningOutsourcing StudiesCost of Service StudiesLoad Research StudiesIT Strategic Planning Communications and IT Infrastructure Planning

System Planning in Bold

9

Planning Responsibilities

Engineering Division Planning Responsibilities

Medium Range Distribution PlanningSystem Protection and Stability PlanningGrid Operations Planning (Present)Post Outage Analysis

Human ResourcesCompensation Study

System Planning in Bold

10

Planning PeriodicityStudy

Update Periodicity

(Years)Last Update

Strategic Planning (Full + Annual Performance Tracking) 5 2006

Forecasting Monthly Apr-07

Long Range Transmission Planning 2 1997

Integrated Resource Planning 3 1999

LEAC modeling and analysis Bi-Annually Jan-07

Quality Management PlanningQMP for Prudent Fuel Use 2 2006

QMP for the Cost-Effective Reduction of System Losses and Unaccounted For Energy 2 2007

QMP for Compliance with PUC Requests and Protocols 2 Draft-2007

QMP for CPAICS Compliance 2 Draft-2007

Grid Operations Planning On-Demand

Business GAP AnalysisEBS GAP Analysis 3 In-Progress

Outsourcing StudiesCabras 1&2 Operations (PMC) 5 2002

Cabras 3&4 Operations (PMC) 5 2004

Fleet Services 2004

Cost of Service Studies 5 1997

Load Research Studies 5 1994

IT Strategic Planning 3 2007

Communications and IT Infrastructure Planning 1 2006

Medium Range Distribution Planning (per feeder) 2 1994

System Protection 5 2005

Relay coordination 2 2005

Short-Circuit Analysis 2 2005

Stability Planning On-Demand 2005

Grid Operations Planning On-Demand

Post Outage Analysis On-Demand

11

Information Sources

SCADA/ Metering/

Monitoring

Engineering Data FMS CMMS CIS Physical

SurveysDaily Plant

Logs

Power System

Operations Logs

Purchased & External

Information

Strategic Planning X X X X X X X XForecasting X X X X X X XLong Range Transmission Planning X XIntegrated Resource Planning X X X X X X X XLEAC modeling and analysis X X XQuality Management Planning X X XGrid Operations Planning X XBusiness GAP Analysis X X X XOutsourcing Studies X X X X X XCost of Service Studies X X X XLoad Research Studies X X X X XIT Strategic Planning X X X X XCommunications and IT Infrastructure Planning X X X XMedium Range Distribution Planning (per feeder) X X X X X XSystem Protection X X XStability Planning X X X XGrid Operations Planning X X X X XPost Outage Analysis X X X X X

Information Sources

Study Simulation Model

12

Planning Models

Require intensive investment in labor, time, and resources to createRequire regular update and maintenance

13

Integrated Resource Plan

Executive Summary,Situation Analysis,Vision, Scope of

Work

Assumptions

Plant Descriptions

BACKGROUND STAKEHOLDERPROCESS

Forecasts: Peaks,Energy, Sales, Fuel

Generation O&MNon-Fuel Cost

Models

Independent PowerProducers (IPP)

Energy ConversionAgreements (ECA)

Cabras 1-4PerformanceManagement

Contracts (PMC)

Generation Costs

Company FinancialInformation

Debt Structures

Capital ImprovementProjects (CIP)

FinancingAssumptions

Fuel Hedging

Finance

Supply Side Options

Guam Seawater AirConditioning

(GSWAC)

Demand SideManagement (DSM)

System ReliabilityModeling (PICES)

AdditionalInformation

STRATEGIST

Integrated Resource Plan (IRP)

14

GPA Forecast – Model I/O Flow Diagram

Proposed –Korean

Economic Forecast

15

Medium-Range Distribution Planning

GPA has a distribution system asset database completed in 2005

Database has not been updatedGPA has not yet populated a distribution system analysis simulation model GPA has an RFP to populate the model, perform the analyses and to train GPA engineers on the simulation model application

16

Grid Reliability

The Power System Control Center tracks SAIDI, SAIFI, CAIDI indicesGeneration Division tracks:

Equivalent Forced Outage Rate (EFOR)Equivalent Availability Factor (EAF)Plant Heat Rate (MBTU/MWh)

17

Plans

Strategic PlanIT Strategic Plan

Enterprise Business Solution (EBS) Gap Analysis (In-Progress)

ForecastsIntegrated Resource Plan (In Progress)Quality Management Plans

Filed With the PUCQMP for Prudent Fuel UseQMP for Cost-Effective Reduction of System Losses and Unaccounted For Energy

System Stability and Relay Coordination StudySemi-annual LEAC plan

18

Integrated Resource Plan Areas of Investigation

Fuel DiversityRenewable EnergyNext Generation Unit AdditionDemand-Side Management

19

Candidate TechnologiesSix Electric Generation Options

Small Coal-Fueled Power PlantSmall Combined-Cycle Power Plant W/ Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) FacilityWind FarmRe-power Piti Power Plant by retro-fitting Piti7 CT into a Combined-Cycle plant by adding an HRSG and an STBiomass Power Generation FacilityReciprocating Engine

Guam SWAC

20

Technology Screening Curve

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Capacity Factor

Leve

lized

Cos

t ($/

MW

h)CFB PC SteamLM6000 CCSS DieselBiomassWind TurbineRetrofit Piti 7 CC

21

Construction TimesMonths

Plant Description Technology

Permitting Start of Eng to CO

Total Duration

Steam PC 30 36 51

CC w/ LNG LM6000 30 28 43

Wind 10x2MW Onshore 15 9 18

Retrofit Piti 7 CC 24 18 30

WTE MSW 30 30 45

Diesel 2x20MW S/MSD 24 18 30

22

Customers and their Needs

As part of GPA’s Strategic Planning Effort, Stakeholders identified their issues with Electric Power Service

23

Commissioners’ and Senior Management’s Gap Analysis – Residential Customers

Current Condition

1. Lack of fully reliable and affordable power

2. Response time after storms

3. Customers not feeling a sense of ownership

4. Customer service lines not satisfactory

Desired Condition

1. Improved reliability and affordability

2. Quicker reconnection of customers

3. Customers taking greater ownership and involvement to ensure high standards maintained at GPA

4. A better customer experience when dealing with GPA

24

Commissioners’ and Senior Management’s Gap Analysis – Tourism Industry

Current Condition1. Lack of fully reliable

power2. Poor power quality at

times3. Response time after

storms

Desired Condition1. Improved reliability2. Improved power quality3. Improved response time

25

Commissioners’ and Senior Management’s Gap Analysis – Military Customers

Current Condition1. Lack of fully reliable power2. Lack of desired level of redundancy3. Insufficient communication of future

plans to GPA4. Insufficient terrorism mitigation

measures5. Poor power quality6. Need to improve safety in areas where

GPA and Navy power systems overlap7. Need for root cause analysis for

system outages8. Integration of master plans9. Real estate issues under CSA and

Lease Agreement

Desired Condition1. Improved reliability2. Improved redundancy3. Better communication of future plans

4. Improved terrorism “hardening” of system5. Improved power quality6. Implementation of improved, documented

and integrated safety practices 7. Implementation of Post Outage

Evaluation Team with the involvement of DOD

8. Share information regarding Integrated Resource Plan, Long Range Transmission Plan and Distribution Plan

9. Investigate and resolve real estate issues

26

Commissioners’ and Senior Management’s Gap Analysis – Employees

Current Condition1. Concern over GPA’s

stability2. Concern over training

programs and resources3. Difficulty in hiring needed

personnel4. Aging work force

5. Political impact on GPA operations

Desired Condition1. Stable direction, even when

leadership changes2. Employees believe adequate

training and resources exist3. Better ability to recruit

needed talent4. Ability to attract younger

workers5. Full removal from the political

process

27

Senior Management develops/definesMain Goal

UnderstandingUnderstandingReliable and low cost power enhances the economic growth and social well being of Guam and its citizens

Economic EngineEconomic EngineRates charged must be

adequate to fund the efficient operation and development of GPA and its energy resources

PassionPassionGPA provides highly valued services to its customers, particularly during times of emergency

GoalGoal = GPA will be rated as an “outstanding utility” by its customers by 2010 (1)

__________(1) To be measured by external customer satisfaction surveys.

28

Quality Management Plans

Ensuring QA/QC for Key Authority Processes Loosely Based on

ISO-9000-2000ISO-9001-2000ISO-9004-2000

29

Quality Management Plans

Quality Management Plan for the Cost –Effective Reduction of Unaccounted For Energy

CCU Ratification RequestedWill be Submitted for CCU Ratification

Quality Management Plan for Prudent Fuel UseQuality Management System for Ensuring LEAC Plan Performance GoalsQuality Management Plan for CPAICS Compliance (New FY 2007)

30

Document HierarchyQuality Management Plan (QMP)

High Level DocumentHigh Level Assessment and DirectionDefines Processes and Sub-processesDefines Key Performance Indicators and Performance CriteriaManagement Sign-Offs as Owners of Key ProcessesCCU Policy RatificationIdentifies Guam Power Authority as an Organization that Believes in High Quality Processes

Quality Management System (QMS)Addresses Specific Concerns Provides Highly Detailed Process Definition Provides Highly Detailed Quality Assurance/Quality Controls Process Definition for Functional Areas Documented in the QMPQuantifies Quality in Terms of $.

31

Methodology

Create Cross-Functional Teams to Evaluate and Refine Documents and Processes

SPORDManagement Analyst III – ExecutiveBusiness Unit With Audit Function ResponsibilityKey Process Owners

32

Results

Prudent Fuel Use$65.7 MM saved since 2003

Unaccounted For Energy$TBD recovered by Meter Task ForceStudies to determine optimum system reactive compensation to reduce system losses

Significant Realized and Potential Cost Reductions

33

Operations Information and Performance

34

Generation Mix552.2 MW Installed Capacity

Combustion Turbines144 MW

26%

Medium Speed Diesels

55.2 MW10%

Steam 185 MW

34%

Slow Speed Diesels168 MW

30%

281.5 MW peak

96% Reserve Margin

35

Performance Standards

GPA has agreed to generation standards establish in collaboration with the Guam Public Utilities Commission (PUC)

90% Baseload Energy ProductionAggregate System Heat Rate (Efficiency)Equivalent Availability Factor

36

Baseload Availability Standards

Generation Unit 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Cabras Unit #1 78% 65% 75% 83% 85% 85% 87%Cabras Unit #2 63% 94% 75% 83% 85% 85% 87%Tanguisson Unit #1 96% 89% 85% 87% 87% 87% 87%Tanguisson Unit #2 81% 42% 85% 87% 87% 87% 87%Cabras Unit #3 0% 56% 62% 76% 90% 90% 90%Cabras Unit #4 66% 67% 62% 76% 90% 90% 90%MEC Unit #8 83% 95% 90% 90% 90% 90% 90%MEC Unit #9 87% 96% 90% 90% 90% 90% 90%

Average Unit EAF Targets 69% 76% 78% 84% 88% 88% 89%

Generation Availability Factor (GAF) 73% 77% 81% 86% 88% 88%

37

EAF 2-Year Rolling AverageBaseloads

38

Peaking and Reserve Unit Availability Standard

87% EAF by FY 2009 Small Medium Speed DieselsCombustion Turbines

39

Peak Load Carrying Capability Set of Units Retired

Maximum Net Generation Capacity Retired

S ystem Capacity After Retirements

LOLE Yielded By Two-Largest Unit Criteria

S ystem Peak Load Carrying Capability at One Day in 4.5 Years LOLE

Reserve Margin For One Day in 4.5 Years LOLE

Load Carrying Capability (%)

(MW) (MW) (Days/Year) (MW) (%) S ystem None 0 565 4.152 382 47.80% 67.70% Cabras 1 62 503 5.715 344 46.10% 68.40% Cabras 2 62 503 5.715 344 46.10% 68.40% Cabras 1&2 124 441 6.742 303 45.40% 68.80% Piti 4 18 547 3.833 366 49.40% 66.90% Piti 5 18 547 3.833 366 49.40% 66.90% Piti 4&5 36 529 3.652 350 51.00% 66.20% Dededo CT 1 22 543 3.064 368 47.70% 67.70% Dededo CT 2 22 543 3.064 368 47.70% 67.70% Dededo CT Plants 44 521 2.356 356 47.60% 67.80% Macheche CT 22 543 4.43 360 51.00% 66.20% Marbo CT 15 550 3.598 372 47.80% 67.60% Yigo CT 22 543 4.43 360 51.00% 66.20% Dededo Diesel Plant 8 557 3.982 376 48.30% 67.40% Talofofo Diesel Plant 10 555 3.973 373 48.70% 67.20% Tenjo Diesel Plant (2 Units) 10 555 3.973 373 48.70% 67.20% Tenjo Diesel Plant (4 Units) 19 546 4.002 365 49.60% 66.90% Tenjo Diesel Plant (6 Units) 28 537 3.86 357 50.40% 66.50%

PLCC for GPA’s System should be 350 MW when all Peaking and Reserve Units have been repaired – FY1999 IRP

40

Capacity Out of Service

66.9 MW of Reserve Capacity is out of service awaiting repairsEnergy Production from Baseloads is over 98% of Total Energy Production reducing GPA’s reliance on this capacity

41

Typical Unit Commitment

Normal daily unit commitment includes:Cabras 1&2Cabras 3&4MEC 8&9

At least one Tanguisson Unit is typically on cold standbyPeaking reserve is usually supplied out of TenjoVistaDispatch base points are computed using an in-house Economic Dispatch model

42

Baseload Energy Production

83%

93% 93% 93% 92%

98% 99%98%

70%

75%

80%

85%

90%

95%

100%

105%

5-YearsPre-CCU

Apr'03 -Sep'03

Oct'03 -Mar'04

Apr'04 -Sep'04

Oct'04 -Mar'05

Apr'05 -Sep'05

Oct'05 -Mar''06

Apr'06 -Jan'07

Perc

ent o

f Tot

al E

nerg

y Pr

oduc

tion

43

Performance Management Contracts (PMC)

PrivatizedManagementProcurementTechnical Back Office

Generating Fuel Savings over prior operating modes

$65.7 Million and climbing

44

2007 Outage Indices

Point of Delivery

TransformerOutages

Under-Frequency

OutagesTotal

Interruptions

TotalOutage

Duration1 T-14(P089) 1 1 1.02 P044(P087) 0 0 0.03 T-9(P282) 0 0 0.04 T-11 0 12 12 40.05 T-12 0 0 0.0 ***SAIDI 48.4 minutes6 T-13 0 0 0.0 ***SAIFI 2.8 interruptions7 T-8 0 0 0.0 CAIDI 17.2 minutes8 T-47 0 0 0.09 T-110 0 0 0.0

10 T-15 0 0 0.011 T-16 0 15 15 48.012 T-23 2 2 282.013 T-24 2 2 282.014 T-132* 1 12 13 121.015 T-22 0 0 0.016 X-34 0 0 0.0

TOTALS 6 39 45 774

* All customers serviced at this delivery point were assumed to have experienced an outage due to system underfrequency.*** Each delivery point was treated as a whole unit due to lack of data regarding actual number of customers serviced through

each metering point.

01/01/07 to 03/30/07

45

Economy

The Marines are coming ….

46

Historical DemandLoad Growth is Currently Flat But is Expected to Climb

281.5

275.0

-

25.0

50.0

75.0

100.0

125.0

150.0

175.0

200.0

225.0

250.0

275.0

300.0

Year 1973 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003

Fiscal Year

Syst

em P

eak

Dem

and

(MW

)

47

Demand Scenario

The Department of Defense (DOD) has not solidified the scope and magnitude of projects for deployment of the 8,000 marines.The following is one scenario of system peak demand assuming information from the DOD Quadrennial Plan and other information currently available to GPAThe Joint Guam Program Office (JGPO) will work with the Authority by providing additional information

48

Outlook For Construction Spending (2005 $)Total Construction Expenditures

$-

$100

$200

$300

$400

$500

$600

$700

$800

$900

$1,000

$1,100

$1,200

$1,300

$1,400

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Mill

ions

of D

olla

rs

Construction Expenditures Construction Expenditures High Growth

49

Assumptions0.6 jobs are created indirectly for every new infrastructure job.Construction employment effects are transitory.One permanent operating or maintenance job is created for every $1 million (2005 $) in construction spending.A/E Firm Average Overhead Rate: 30%.Guam Average Hourly Earnings In Construction ($2005): $11.50Mainland Average Hourly Earnings In Construction ($2005): $37.00Construction Expenditure per Construction Job: $189,150Percentage of Materials & Supplies in Construction Expenditures: 67%Percentage of Labor Costs in Construction Expenditures: 33%Percentage of I-94 Labor: 50%Percentage of Mainland Labor: 50%I-94 Workers, % of wages spent locally: 30%Mainland Workers, % of wages spent locally: 50%Indirect Employment Multiplier: 0.60

50

Construction ProjectsE s tim a te d E s t im a te d

E s t im a te d P ro je c t P ro je c tC o s t S ta r t C o m p le t io n

K ilo W h a r f U p g ra d e b y B la c k C o n s tru c tio n 1 0 ,7 0 0 ,0 0 0$ 2 0 0 6 2 0 0 6X ra y W h a r f U p g ra d e b y S u n W o o C o rp 2 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0$ 2 0 0 6 2 0 0 6R o m e o S ie r ra W h a rv e s U p g ra d e b y R e lia b le B u ild e rs 3 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0$ 2 0 0 6 2 0 0 6D re d g in g N a v a l H a rb o r 8 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0$ 2 0 0 6 2 0 0 6N a v a l W a te rw o rk s P ro je c ts 3 0 ,9 0 0 ,0 0 0$ 2 0 0 6 2 0 0 6N a v a l P o w e r S ys te m H a rd e n in g a n d R e c a p ita lize 4 0 0 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0$ 2 0 0 7 2 0 1 7A lp h a B ra v o W h a rv e s P ro je c t 5 5 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0$ 2 0 0 6 2 0 0 7N e w D o D E A E le m e n ta ry /M id d le S c h o o l 4 0 ,6 0 0 ,0 0 0$ 2 0 0 6 2 0 0 8N e w D o D E A H ig h S c h o o l 4 0 ,6 0 0 ,0 0 0$ 2 0 0 6 2 0 0 8H o u s in g c o n s tru c tio n a n d re n o v a tio n a t N a v a l S ta tio n 5 1 2 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0$ 2 0 0 6 2 0 2 5M u n it io n s s to ra g e fa c ilit ie s a t A A F B 1 5 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0$ 2 0 0 6 2 0 0 6G u a m A rm y N a tio n a l G u a rd F a c ility P h a s e IV 4 ,9 0 0 ,0 0 0$ 2 0 0 6 2 0 0 6R e p la c e A A F B C a n in e F a c ility 3 ,5 0 0 ,0 0 0$ 2 0 0 6 2 0 0 7G P A U n d e rg ro u n d L in e s U p g ra d e 2 0 0 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0$ 2 0 0 6 2 0 1 3G T A M o d e rn iza t io n In v e s tm e n t 1 0 0 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0$ 2 0 0 6 2 0 1 0W a te r S ys te m U p g ra d e 3 6 0 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0$ 2 0 0 7 2 0 0 9P -7 8 0 A , U p g ra d e N W F ie ld , P h I 1 2 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0$ 2 0 0 7 2 0 0 9P -7 8 0 B , U p g ra d e N W F ie ld , P h II 1 2 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0$ 2 0 0 7 2 0 0 9G lo b a l H a w k C o m p le x 4 7 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0$ 2 0 0 7 2 0 0 9P -5 0 2 , K ilo W h a r f E x te n s io n , P h I 5 5 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0$ 2 0 0 7 2 0 0 7P -4 9 4 , H a rd e n E le c tr ic a l S ys te m , D is t/S u b s 5 0 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0$ 2 0 0 7 2 0 0 9N a v a l H o s p ita l R e p la c e m e n t 1 4 5 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0$ 2 0 0 8 2 0 1 1P -5 0 2 A , K ilo W h a rf E x te n s io n , P h II 2 5 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0$ 2 0 0 8 2 0 0 8F u tu re N a v a l C o n s tru c tio n 3 ,1 6 8 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0$ 2 0 1 0 2 0 2 5H ig h G ro w th S c e n a r io"8 ,0 0 0 M a r in e s f ro m O k in a w a " 2 ,1 0 0 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0$ 2 0 0 7 2 0 1 1A irc ra f t C a rr ie r G ro u p 3 ,1 5 0 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0$ 2 0 1 0 2 0 1 5S u b m a rin e 1 1 8 9 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0$ 2 0 1 0 2 0 1 4S u b m a rin e 2 1 8 9 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0$ 2 0 1 5 2 0 1 9S u b m a rin e 3 1 8 9 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0$ 2 0 2 0 2 0 2 4S u b m a rin e 4 1 8 9 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0$ 2 0 2 5 2 0 2 9

T o ta l E s tim a te d V a lu e o f C o n s tru c tio n 1 0 ,7 9 6 ,6 0 0 ,0 0 0$

51

GPA Scans for Project UpdatesProjects

Start CompletionFY2008 Projects

Technical training facility at Northwest Field $ 5,800,000 FY2008 AAFB http://www.kuam.com/news/22468.aspx

Improve security of electrical systems at Big Navy $ 59,400,000 FY2008 Naval Station http://www.kuam.com/news/22468.aspx

Fitness center at Naval Base Guam $ 45,200,000 FY2008 Naval Station http://www.kuam.com/news/22468.aspx

Phase I of a potable water distribution system at Naval Base Guam $ 31,400,000 FY2008 Naval Station http://www.kuam.com/news/22468.aspx

Repair and upgrade the Naval Base Guam Wastewater Treatment Plant $ 40,800,000 FY2008 Naval Station http://www.kuam.com/news/22468.aspx

Awarded Projects

Upgrade of the Northwest Field Infrastructure (Core Tech International Corp.) $ 10,000,000 Apr-07 Nov-08 AAFB

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/2007/05/us-military-gearing-up-on-guam/index.php

Phase 1 & Option 1 (Phase II) to replace typhoon damaged homes at North Tipalao (Watts Constructors, LLC in Honolulu) $ 78,600,000 Apr-07 May-09 Naval Facilities

Phase 1 & Option 1 (Phase II) to replace typhoon damaged homes at North Tipalao (Watts Constructors, LLC in Honolulu)

Replacement of 61 housing units at Old Apra (Black Construction Corp.) $ 42,100,000 Apr-07 May-09 Naval Facilities


Housing operations and maintenance services for various Naval Installation (GFS Group, Guam) $ 7,500,000 Mar-07 Mar-08 Naval Facilities


Global Hawk Complex (Black Construction Corp.) $ 42,000,000 2007 May-09 AAFB Part of increased use of UAVs by the Air Force

Additional InformationEstimated Cost ($000)

Estimated Project Location and Function

52

Economic Growth Scenarios

In a meeting with JGPO, one of the Scenarios Identified had several years at over $3 billion in construction projects eachHowever, nothing is settled.The Joint Guam Program Office advised not to enter into long-term power production contracts based on assumptions of Department of Defense Loads until its National Environmental Policy Act report is finalized. Doing so could conceivably hinder the process.

53

GPA Demographics

54

Employee Years of Service

516

28

144

176

69

86

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200N

o. o

f Em

ploy

ees

31-35 25-30 22-24 15-21 10-14 5-9 0-4Years of Sevice Range

55

GPA Employment History

608666

678 668626 565 578 589

537 510 521 536 527

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

FY1995

FY1997

FY1999

FY2001

FY2003

FY2005

FY2007 thru Apr

56

GPA Resignation Analysis

RESIGNATIONS

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

FY1999

FY2000

FY2001

FY2002

FY2003

FY2004

FY2005

FY2006

FY2007

Inadequate $

Relocate

Personal

FY 99 FY 00 FY 01 FY 02 FY 03 FY 04 FY 05 FY 06 FY 07

2 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 0

5 5 2 6 18 7 1 3 1

17 27 23 32 43 35 22 9 11

23 28 20 10

REASONS

Inadequate $

Personal

GRAND TOTAL

Relocate/Accept Other Work 10 21 21 626

57

GPA ELIGIBLE RETIREES (Operations)

05

1015202530354045

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

BY AGEBY SERVICE

(1) 2005 (2) 2006 (3) 2007 (4) 2008 (5) 2009 (6) 2010 (7) 2011 (8) 2012 (9) 2013 (10) 2014 (11) 2015

YEARBY

SERVICE BY AGE TOTAL

2007 33 45 78

2008 9 5 14

2009 5 4 9

2010 17 12 29

2011 16 15 31

2012 4 9 13

174TOTAL =

YEARBY

SERVICE BY AGE TOTAL

2011 4 8 12

2012 13 6 19

2013 10 8 18

2014 8 11 19

2015 6 9 15

83TOTAL =

58

End of Fiscal Year FTE Count

527536608

666 678 668 626565 578 589 537 510 521

0100200300400500600700800

FY1995

FY1996

FY1997

FY1998

FY1999

FY2000

FY2001

FY2002

FY2003

FY2004

FY2005

FY2006

FY2007(thruApr)

Fiscal Year

Full-

Tim

e Em

ploy

ees

59

End