Minutes of the ESHA Executive Board 24 September 2010 at 10:00 – 18:00 APREN Office, Lisbon, Portugal
Participants: Members of the Executive Board : Anne Pénalba (through Skype) António Sa Da Costa Marko Gospodjinački Martina Prechtl Nino Frosio (through Skype)
France Hydro-Electricité APREN ESHA Austrian Small Hydropower Association Studio Frosio
ESHA Staff : Lauha Fried
ESHA
Excused: Bernhard Pelikan Jean-Pierre Corbet Vincent Denis
University of Vienna HEA-E MHyLab
The EB was composed validly as 5 out of 8 members were present. Accordingly, the simple majority is reached with at least 3 votes in favour and the qualified majority with 4 votes in favour.
Agenda of the meeting 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
Welcome and approval of agenda Financial situation and internal issues Certification for Hydro Hidroenergia 2012 Preparation of ESHA common policy and communication position Other
1
Minutes 1. Welcome and approval of the agenda ESHA president, Marko Gospodjinački, opened the second meeting of the ESHA Executive Board. Marko welcomed the participants and thanked António Sa Da Costa for the kind invitation to hold the meeting at the APREN Offices. He informed the Board about last minute flight cancellations, due to air traffic control strike in France, which prevented Ghislain Weisrock and Nino Frosio from attending the meeting. The quorum, which requires 50 % = 4 members of the EB to participate, would however be reached when Anne Pénalba and Nino Frosio would attend the meeting through Skype. The agenda was approved with the following changes: It was decided to start the meeting with agenda point 4 (Hidroenergia 1012). Two issues were added to the agenda point 6 (Other): (1) Difficulties faced by the Stream Map project and (2) ESHA website. 2. Hidroenergia 2012 Marko reminded the Executive Board about what had been decided with the Hidroenergia Conference at the first EB meeting: The Hidroenergia name and logo from Lausanne will be kept; The website address is kept as www.hidroenergia.eu and will be registered if possible. It will be moved from the Swiss server to another server if needed; Hidroenergia will remain an ESHA conference with a local partner co-organising the event; ESHA will keep the rights and responsibility regarding the design, scientific committee, evaluation of abstracts and programme; The local organiser can outsource part of the work; A Hidroenergia Working Group will be established with Vincent Denis as the leader. Marko continued by informing the Board about himself together with Vincent Denis and Bernhard Pelikan travelling to Wroclaw, Poland on 5-6 November 2010 to see the proposed venue and to further discuss issues linked to the organization of the event. Also, given that Vincent decided not to be the leader of the Hidroenergia WG due to the lack of time, this WG has no objective to exist. Proposal: After thorough discussion the following items were proposed: 1. A Hidroenergia company will not be established as the conference only takes place biennially and there wouldn’t be enough manpower and probably financial resources to manage it. It is up to the local partner to decide how much of the work will be outsourced. 2. Hidroenergia Working Group (HWG) will not be established due to lack of time in general. 3. ESHA will check whether there could be fiscal consequences to ESHA because of the profit of the conference in Lausanne. 4. A ‘permanent’ design layout for the HE conferences will be chosen which will be owned by ESHA. The Polish Small Hydropower Association may provide a new HE logo design for ESHA in ten days time. Simultaneously, several other offers for price for logo, website and publications design will be requested by ESHA, Martina Prechtl and Anne Pénalba from different countries. Afterwards, it will be decided whether a new design will be chosen or the current (HE10) design kept for the future years. 5. Financial approach regarding profit sharing two initial proposals were discussed one with fixed amount and another with percentage. Finally the following was proposed: 60 % for ESHA, 40 % for local partner with a minimum of 20 000 € (this figure needs to be confirmed after the result from HE10 is received);
ESHA 2nd Executive Board meeting, 24 September 2010 in Lisbon, Portugal 2
6. The following will be prepared to help local partner not needing to ‘invent the wheel’ every time from the beginning: (i) A checklist of issues that need to be taken into account when organising HE Conference prepared by MHyLab will be translated into English; (ii) The guidelines will define all basic standpoints; these are the basis for the checklist; (iii) Standard contracts, especially one between ESHA and the National Association; (iv) Note on what needs to be taken into account with termination of the event; (v) Timeline showing the schedule needed for the organisation. Patricija (from SSHA) will be asked to prepare the Guidelines and Gema will be kindly asked to give her comments on the guidelines with the experience she has from organising previous HE conferences. For the profit sharing Anne Pénalba pointed out the importance that the formula is fair and it should not stop the future associations withdrawing from cooperation. Nino Frosio also added that ESHA should keep certain critical issues such as quality of programme and the scientific committee under its responsibility. Decision 1 of the EB: The proposals above were approved unanimously (5/5). 3. Financial situation and internal issues Financial situation Financial Overview was disseminated to the EB before the meeting with the following remarks: ESHA has not yet sent the invoices for the membership fee in total amount of ca 56.000 € + all the invoices we are waiting the NA’s to send the Pi (MW). The invoices should be prepared shortly. From the accountancy point of view, we expected to book at the end of the year an amount of 155.000 € for the work done by the projects. For the Postgraduate courses we have invoiced for an amount of 30.790 €. (amount not foreseen last year in the budget 2010) We don't know yet what will be the income from the Hidroenergia 2010. Marko concluded that since all information is not yet available it is not possible to make conclusions about the financial situation. This also has an impact on decisions to be made regarding new ESHA staff. Marko is currently in the process of selecting new Secretary General. He has received over 30 high quality applications for the position of Secretary General. First round of interviews will be conducted on 1 October in Brussels. Agreement on hiring new ‘Officer’ together with HEA-E need to be finalised. As a temporary solution for the lack of staff an intern will be hired for 6 months post. For the posts of Secretary General and ‘Officer’ a 6 months probation period will be set. Financial situation will be discussed further when more information is available. Also an agreement on cooperation between ESHA and HEA-E is under progress and will be provided to the EB for discussion in due time. Internal issues Marko proposed to the EB to establish permanent Working Groups - be the Environmental Working Group (EWG), the Scientific-Technical Working Group (STWG) and the Policy Working Group (PWG). The topics such as the WDF and Alpine Convention inside the EWG would form Tasks Groups under the WG. Each Task group should have a leader and the leader of the WG would coordinate them. Marko proposed Martina Prechtl to take the position as the leader of the EWG, Bernhard Pelikan as the STWG leader and Lauha Fried as the Task ESHA 2nd Executive Board meeting, 24 September 2010 in Lisbon, Portugal 3
group leader for WFD and the leader of the PWG. Sara Gollessi has expressed her willingness to contribute to the work of the EWG without leadership responsibilities. Anne Pénalba also volunteered to help in the work of the EWG. Martina informed the Board that the activities of the Alpine Convention were finishing so there would not be a need to form an Alpine Convention WG or Task group anymore. Martina also asked for a speaker for the ending conference of the Alpine Convention to present ESHA position which will take place in Venice in the end of November. ESHA will request a speaker possibly from Italy (Studio Frosio, APER) to carry out this task. Proposal: It was proposed to establish the following three permanent Working Groups: 1. Environmental Working Group – leader Martina Prechtl Task Group on WFD – leader Lauha Fried (In order to discuss and form ESHA positions on the environmental issues, certification issues etc.) 2. Scientific/Technical Working Group – leader Bernhard Pelikan (tbc) Task group on technical issues & innovation - leader Vincent Denis (tbc)? (In order to discuss scientific and technical issues related to research, development and innovation and grid related issues) 3. Policy Working Group – leader Lauha Fried (In order to form ESHA position on general policy issues such as harmonisation of support schemes, European energy strategy etc.) WG’s on financial & administrative issues or communications would not be needed as the EB is dealing with these. Decision 2 of the EB: The proposals above were approved unanimously (5/5). 4. Certification for Hydro Marko briefed the Board about current situation where questions on certification of hydro are rising daily and the CHOICE project is in an important phase and, hence he proposed to tackle this topic and take a decision about preparing a common ESHA position on certification. Marko explained that the question of certification was twofold: It can be like a trap when it requires too high environmental criteria, but can also be an opportunity to get a higher electricity price (and market value) and/or prolonged operation. The key question was whether certification is something we principally want? Can we control the environmental criteria and the support systems in a way that a certification system brings us (and the environment) more benefits? The EB discussed the topic with multiple views: Martina was against any additional procedures as the licensing process with different assessments was complicated enough already. She also pointed out that it would bring additional cost which all producers would not be able to afford. Also as it is voluntary labelling would in the end divide SHP into good and bad hydro. Anne in principle supported the idea of certification in France which could boost the image of SHP by proving additionalities and demonstrating best practice. Certification could also be a way to improve existing plants by modernisation. She commented thought that it would be important to find a solution which would not be too costly as the system could only work through if the trader would be willing and able to sell the product.
ESHA 2nd Executive Board meeting, 24 September 2010 in Lisbon, Portugal 4
Proposal: It was proposed to gather views and comments from each EB and some other ESHA members involved with this issue. Based on this a common position would be prepared which could then be presented for approval at the December 2010 Governing Board meeting. Until then, ESHA should not communicate any formal position on this topic. Decision 3 of the EB: The proposal was approved unanimously (5/5). 5. Preparation of ESHA common policy and communication position Marko had initially proposed to compose a short-term working group to work on ESHA common policy and communication position. After discussion it seemed unnecessary to form a separate group for this issue as the EB as a whole was already dealing with it. Proposal: It was proposed to deal with ESHA common policy and communication position within the EB and not to form a new Working Group for this topic. Decision 4 of the EB : The proposal was approved unanimously (5/5). Under this topic, the importance of ESHA common positions on different key topics came out. It is essential that we can speak with one voice to promote specific issues and the sector. Currently there was a problematical case as the Secretary General, Gema San Bruno, had agreed to make presentations at two events: A more general one on looking ahead for the hydro sector at Hydro10 in Lisbon and another one at EDF seminar in France on Certification. After having analysed and discussed the presentations, the Board was hesitant to present views in public that had not been agreed on beforehand within ESHA and are not supported by the EB. It was decided to substitute Gema’s presentation on certification in France with a general one, prepared – if possible - by APER. Given the lack of ESHA’s common positions and the importance of Gema’s last month to prepare the handover, EB decided to release her from representational duties during the last month of her occupation with ESHA. She would start a leave on 1 October 2010 which would allow her to have enough time to concentrate on a proper handover of duties for the new Secretary General. Proposal: It was proposed release the current Secretary General, Gema San Bruno, from her daily representative duties and to withdraw her presentation on certification in France. She would start a leave on 1 October 2010 which would allow her to have enough time to prepare a comprehensive handover of duties for the new Secretary General. Decision 5 of the EB : The proposal was approved unanimously (5/5). 6. Other ESHA Website Martina Prechtl made a proposal on making a page with information about Small Hydropower in each member state on ESHA website. Each page could include a link to the respective National Small Hydropower Association. Nino Frosio opposed this by pointing out that it would be a huge work to keep it updated and then we would again have many pages with old information on ESHA site. It was proposed to deal with this issue when ESHA staff situation would be back to normal. It would be up to the national associations to provide information and to decide whether they only prefer to have a link to their page.
ESHA 2nd Executive Board meeting, 24 September 2010 in Lisbon, Portugal 5
Proposal: It was proposed to collect information on each member state for ESHA website when ESHA staff situation would be back to normal. It would be up to the national associations to provide information and to decide whether they only prefer to have a link to their page. Decision 6 of the EB: The proposal was approved unanimously (5/5). Stream Map Lauha Fried informed the Board about difficulties faced with the Stream Map project where some partners had not, regardless of numerous reminders and promises, given any input. One crucial partner who also is a work package leader of the project is the BHA. Lauha asked advice from the Board on what to do as last resource in this kind of a situation. Can we terminate a contract with an important ESHA Member? It was proposed to further discuss the issue with David Williams and wait until after next project meeting on 22 October before further action is taken. Proposal: It was proposed to further discuss the issue with the BHA and wait until after next project meeting on 22 October before further action is taken. Decision 7 of the EB: The proposal was approved unanimously (5/5). Marko closed the meeting by thanking everyone for their valuable input. It was proposed to hold the next meeting of the EB together with GB in December in Brussels. Exact date and venue will be communicated in due time.
ESHA Secretariat October 2010 Brussels- Belgium
ESHA 2nd Executive Board meeting, 24 September 2010 in Lisbon, Portugal 6