20141105AVU to Staff 1-9.pdf

Avista Corp.
141 1 East Mission P.O. Box 3727
Spokane. Washington 99220-0500
Telephone [phone]
#rrtstr
CorP.rif,nEIl./r11f}.{_\-r!1.. ! !' .- .,
TollFree 800-727-9170
I0tt* H0V *$ AH l0: 0b
ILil:ii-iI i'''r-ii,, , .
November 4,2014 i.lT li.iTiE$ tjfi-tl,4l$Sl[rtr
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
472W. Washington St.
Boise,lD 83720-0074
Attn: Kristine A. Sasser
Deputy Attorney General
Re: Production Request of the Commission Staff in Case No. AVU-E-14-10
Dear Ms. Sasser,
Enclosed are an original and three copies of Avista's responses to IPUC Staffs production
requests in the above referenced dockets. Included in this mailing are Avista's responses to
production requests 01 - 09. The electronic versions of the responses were emailed on lll04ll4.
If there are any questions regarding the enclosed information, please contact Paul Kimball at
[phone] or via e-mail at [e-mail]
Sincerely,
,-')v1/--fu-
Paul Kimball
Regulatory Analyst
Enclosures
AVISTA CORP. RIC !: I1,[ D
RESPONSE TO REQIIEST FOR INFORMATION
,
JURISDICTIoN: IDAH0 DATE PREPARED: 1O/3 II2[I4 ?OIII T,IOV -5 fiH IO: OIT
CASE NO: AVU-E-14-10 WITNESS: N/A , ,=,, ',;ll,.i,ij^l-J.1,,.i.
REQUESTER: PUC Staff RESPoNDER: Renee Coelilo; ill i i:5 uu'vi;';lriljiC';i
TYPE: Production Request DEPT: DSM
REQUEST NO.: Staff- 01 TELEPHONE: [phone]EMAIL: [e-mail]
REQUEST:
Please explain the reasons for the differences in the estimated equipment costs of Washington
State and Out-of-State equipment listed in Table No. I of the Application.
RESPONSE:
The estimated $3,000/kW cost noted in Table No. I for Washington is the cost of a solar panel
manufactured in Washington State, versus the $1,000/kW cost for solar panels manufactured
elsewhere. While solar panels manufactured in Washington are more expensive than their non-
Washington counterparts, the incentives provided by the State more than offset the incremental
cost, thereby providing an overall net lower cost.
Page I ofl
AVISTA CORP.
RESPONSE TO REQIIEST FOR INFORMATION
JURISDICTION: IDAHO DATE PREPARED: 10/3112014
CASE NO: AVU-E-14-10 WITNESS: N/A
REQUESTER: PUC Staff RESPONDER: Renee CoelhoTYPE: Production Request DEPT: DSM
REQUEST NO.: Staff- 02 TELEPHONE: (s09) 49s-8607EMAIL: [e-mail]
REQUEST:
Please provide an explanation of the grant selection process. Include project eligibility criteria
and requirements. How will the program administration be funded?
RESPONSE:
In order to promote the awareness of renewable energy generation options, the Company intends
to award grants for solar energy projects to non-residential customers, with a preference given to
schools or other non-profit facilities.
The Company will consider the following criteria when reviewing applications:o Community exposure and educational benefits;o GeogFaphic distribution throughout the Company's electric service territory;o Project feasibility;. Project readiness;o Installation costs and other available financing to mitigate project costs; ando Use of Idaho or Washington manufactured equipment.
The administration of the program will be funded entirely from voluntary Buck-A-Block
customer contributions.
Page I of I
AVISTA CORP.
RESPONSE TO REQITEST FOR TNFORMATTON
JURISDICTION: IDAHO DATE PREPARED: t0l3tl20l4
CASE NO: AW-E-14-10 WITNESS: N/A
REQUESTER: PUC Staff RESPONDER: Renee CoelhoTYPE: Production Request DEPT: DSM
REQUEST NO.: Staff - 03 TELEPHONE: [phone]EMAIL: [e-mail]
REQTJEST:
Please explain how projects will be funded. For example, will applicants be required to secure a
portion of total funding from matching sources? Please explain.
RESPONSE:
Applicants are not required to secure a portion of the funding for a project. While preference
may be given to projects that do not require 100% funding from a Buck A Block grant, lack of
other funding would not rule it out as a potential candidate that may receive full funding of the
installation, depending upon the merits of their application. Avista would reimburse the
customer for its costs using Buck A Block funds once the installation is complete and in service.
Page I of I
AVISTA CORP.
RESPONSE TO REQIIEST FOR INFORMATION
JURISDICTION:
CASE NO:
REQUESTER:
TYPE:
REQUEST NO.:
IDAHO
AVU-E-14-10
PUC Staff
Production Request
Staff- 04
DATE PREPARED:
WITNESS:
RESPONDER:
DEPT:
TELEPHONE:
EMAIL:
t013U20t4
N/A
Renee Coelho
DSM
(s09) 49s-8607
renee. coelho@avistacorp. com
REQUEST:
What, if any, alternative uses for excess funds were considered? In particular, did Avista
consider increasing the size of blocks that customers purchase under the existing Buck-A-Block
program?
RESPONSE:
Avista has considered whether the size of the blocks should be changed. However, some of the
goals for the Buck A Block program include offering significant value for the customer's
voluntary contribution, as well as making the program easy to participate in, understand, and
administer. Currently, we believe the "block" size of 300 kwh appears to be right-sized for the
progftrm as it has been consistently one of the top five lowest premiums for programs of this type
in the nation. We believe that the program is providing significant value at current block levels,
and increasing the size of the blocks would not be very meaningful. Keeping the block size
consistent over time also reinforces understanding of the progam offering.
Given that another goal of the program is to provide awareness of renewable generation options,
we believe the addition of a solar component would provide more value to program participants.
Page I of I
AVISTA CORP.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR INFORMATION
ruRISDICTION:
CASE NO:
REQUESTER:
TYPE:
REQUEST NO.:
IDAHO
AVU-E-14-10
PUC Statr
Production Request
Staff - 05
DATE PREPARED: l0l3l 12014
WITNESS:
RESPONDER:
DEPT:
TELEPHONE:
EMAIL:
N/A
Renee Coelho
DSM
(s09) 4es-8607
renee. coelho@avistaco{p. com
REQUEST:
Please provide any cost/benefit analysis performed justifuing the use of surplus Schedule 95
funds on rooftop solar projects. Did Avista perform any analysis comparing its rooftop solar
proposal to other types of renewal energy resources? Is so, please provide that analysis.
RESPONSE:
The Company has not conducted any cost/benefit analyses related to the use of surplus Schedule
95 funds, nor did it conduct any analysis comparing the proposed program to other types of
renewable energy resources.
We do believe, however that the proposed program provides an additional avenue for building
renewable energy awareness among our customers while at the same time benefitting local
schools and non-profit institutions. Further, the renewable resources included in the Buck A
Block portfolio would be more visible than the resources where the renewable energy credits are
currently being sourced. This approach offers customers the opportunity to see for themselves
how a renewable system functions.
Page I ofl
AVISTA CORP.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST BOR INFORMATION
JURISDICTION: IDAHO DATE PREPARED: I0l3ll20l4
CASE NO: AVU-E-14-10 WITNESS: N/A
REQUESTER: PUC Staff RESPONDER: Renee CoelhoTYPE: Production Request DEPT: DSM
REQUEST NO.: Staff- 06 TELEPHONE: [phone]EMAIL: [e-mail]
REQUEST:
How will the details of this change be communicated to existing Buck-A-Block customers?
RESPONSE:
If the Company's request is approved by the Commission, the addition of the grant program will
be provided, initially, in the Buck A Block annual newsletter that is issued during the 4s quarter.
The Renewable Energy Generation page on avistautilities.com, which includes information
regarding the Buck-A-Block program, will be updated and will also include all of the program
details including eligibility and other requirements.
Page 1 of I
AVISTA CORP.
RrspoNsE To REQITEST FOR TNFORMATION
JURISDICTION:
CASE NO:
REQUESTER:
TYPE:
REQUEST NO.:
IDAHO
AVU-E-14-10
PUC Staff
Production Request
Staff - 07
DATE PREPARED: l0l3l 12014WITNESS: N/A
RESPONDER: Renee CoelhoDEPT: DSM
TELEPHONE: (509) 49s-8607EMAIL: renee.coelho@avistaco{p.com
REQUEST:
Does Avista track Schedule 95 contributions by jurisdiction? If so, how much of the $200,000
surplus is attributable to Idaho jurisdiction customers?
RESPONSE:
While Avista tracks the voluntary contributions from customers on a jurisdictional basis, total
programmatic costs are not separately tracked. In 2013, approximately 22.4% of the Buck A
Block contributions came from Idaho customers. Therefore, using that same contribution
percentage, approximately $44,800 of the $200,000 surplus is attributable to Idaho jurisdictional
customers.
Page I of I
AVISTA CORP.
RESPONSE TO REQIIEST FOR INFORMATION
JURISDICTION: IDAHO DATE PREPARED: l0l3ll20l4
CASE NO: AVU-E-14-10 WITNESS: N/A
REQUESTER: PUC Staff RESPONDER: Renee Coelho
TYPE: Production Request DEPT: DSM
REQUEST NO.: Staff - 08 TELEPHONE: [phone]EMAIL: [e-mail]
REQUEST:
Please provide forecasted estimates of the surplus balance through 2016 if Avista were not to use
additional funds on its rooftop solar proposal.
RESPONSE:
The forecasted surplus balance for Schedule 95 through 2016 is estimated to be between
$150,000 and $200,000. This amount is based on the assumption that the RECs used in the
progftrm would be acquired at current market prices and that the marketing of the program
remains unchanged.
Page I of I
AVISTA CORPORATION
RESPONSE TO REQITEST FOR INFORMATION
JURISDICTION: IDAHO DATE PREPARED: I0l3ll20l4
CASE NO: AVU-E-14-10 WITNESS: Patrick Ehrbar
REQUESTER: IPUC Staff RESPONDER: Patrick EhrbarTYPE: Production Request DEPARTMENT: State & Federal Regulation
REQUESTNO.: Staff - 09 TELEPHONE: [phone]
REQUEST:
Because Avista's fixed costs are recovered primarily through the commodity rate and not through
a demand charge or the monthly service charge, has Avista performed any studies or analysis
illustrating how much of a subsidy will be paid by other customers to cover the fixed costs
associated with the rooftop solar projects?
RESPONSE:
Provided below is an estimated unrecovered fixed costs which would be shifted to other customers
in future general rate case proceedings should 40 kW of solar be installed in Avista's system under
the proposed program. An estimate of $0.05 per kWh hour was used for the estimate ofthe amount
of fixed costs recovered in the variable energy rates, as it is unknown at this time what customers
(and therefore what rate schedule) would receive a grant.
Estimated Unrecovered Fixed Costs from Buck-a-block Solar Program (System)
a Capacity Factor 14%
b System Size 40 kW
c Annual kWh (a * b) 49,056 kwh
d Estimated Fixed Cost in Variable Energy Rates $ 0.05
e Annual Under-recovered Fixed Costs (c*d) S 2,453