20190401Avista to Staff Supplemental 12-22.pdf

AEutsra
Avista Corp.
l4l I East Mission P.O. Box 3727
Spokane, Washington 99220-0500
Telephone [phone]
Toll Free 800-727-9170
March 29,2019
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
472W. Washington St.
Boise, lD 83720-0074
Attn: Diane Hanian
Re: Production Request of Commission Staff in Case No. AVU-E-18-12
Dear Ms. Hanian,
Enclosed are Avista's Supplemental responses to IPUC Staffs production requests in the above
referenced docket. Included in this mailing are the original and two paper copies of Avista's
response to production request: Staff 12-14 Supplemental and Staff 22 Supplemental. The
electronic version of the responses were emailed on 0312912019.
If there are any questions regarding the enclosed information, please contact Jaime Majure at (509)
495-7839 or via e-mail at [e-mail].
Sincerely,
/d/9a,-%grr""
Regulatory Policy Analyst
Avista Utilities
j aime.maj ure@ avistacorp. com
s09.495.7839
Enclosures
AY
AVISTA CORPORATION
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR INFORMATION
JURISDICTION
CASE NO:
REQUESTER:
TYPE:
REQUEST NO.:
IDAHO
AVU-E-18-12
IPUC Staff
Production Request
Staff - 12 Supplemental
DATE PREPARED
WITNESS:
RESPONDER:
DEPARTMENT:
TELEPHONE:
03/25120t9
N/A
Amber Gifford
Energy Efficiency
(s09) 49s-2896
REQUEST:
Exhibit 1, Section 5.5 indicates that the Company's fuel efficiency program realization rate
was 62Yo. What steps are the Company taking to improve the accuracy of the methodology
used to estimate this program's savings?
RESPONSE:
Avista has updated its Fuel Efficiency program's savings values based on Nexant's
2016-2017 Electric Impact Evaluation Report.
SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE (03 125 /2019)z
To provide fuither context, the information provided below outlines the conclusions and
recommendation identified in Nexant's 2016-2017 Electric Impact Evaluation Report, with
respect to the Fuel Efficiency Programr:
Conclusion: The evaluation team found a low realization rate for the Fuel Efficiency
program (62%). We believe this unchangedrcalization rate from the previous biennium is
primarily the result of two issues:
r Reported savings for the 2016-2017 program cycle were, on average, high as the
program savings value was initially reduced in mid-Q2 2016 and then further
reduced mid-Q1 of 2017 to be in alignment with evaluation results provided from
the previous program cycle.
. Annual average household consumption was, on average, 18% lower for
participants in the 2016-2017 program cycle relative to participants in the prior
program cycle. If participant consumption had been similar to the previous
biennium, the program realization rate would have been approximately 74o/o.
Recommendation: For future program cycles, we recommend Avista reduce their
reported savings for the Fuel Efficiency program. Avista should look to the Low Income
conversion deemed savings assumptions and consider better aligning assumptions used to
estimate reported savings for Fuel Efficiency and the Low Income programs. Additionally,
customer profiling will help gauge anticipated savings by understanding customers' annual
consumption profile and the expected percent savings that can occur through
implementation of the Fuel Efficiency program measures.
Avista's response to Nexant's recommendation was to adjust the savings values for the 2019
program year onward, in accordance with Nexant's report. Tables Nos. 1 and2 below outline
| 2017 Avista Annual Conservation Report, Appendix A - Idaho 2016-2017 Electric Impact Evaluation, pg. 107
the modifications that were made to the incentive levels for each measure within the Fuel
Efficiency Program, as well as the revised cost effectiveness values:
Table No. I - Revised Incentive for 20192
Measure Description 20r 8 2019
E to NG Furnace $ I,s00 s 1,200
E to NG Combo $ 2,250 $ r,700
E to NG Wall Heater $ 1,300 Eliminated
Table No. 2 - Revised Cost Effectiveness Values for 20193
Ileasure Description Program ID tlnits Inceutive Est. Sub
TRC
Est, Sub
LICT
EI.EC RES -.} CE}ITR.4,L NG Fuel Con,'ersions 82 $ l,:00.00 1."I2 4"49
E --> l,IG $pace arrd DH1&r Fuel Coff-ersien*i9 $ 1,700.00 1.08 .{ '}{
Revised Savings values
In addition to the modifications above, Avista has historically revised its savings values to
align with Nexant's evaluationsa in order to adaptively manage its program and better refine
our savings forecasts. Table No. 3 below illustrates the annual revised savings values.
Table No. 3- Annual Revised Savings Values
Please see StaflPR_l2 Supplemental Attachment A for a copy of the memo sent from
Nexant to Avista that illustrates the adjusted savings values. Avista incorporated these
savings values into its 2019 Annual Conservation Plan.
2 lD 2019 Annual Conservation Plan Appendix A - Program Plans
3 lD 2019 Annual Conservation Plan Appendix A - Program Plans
4 Staff PR_22 * Attachments A & B
Measure
Description
2016
kwh
2016
Therm
2017
kwh
2017
Therm
2018
kwh
20r8
Therm
2019
kwh
2019
Therm
E to NG Fumace 12,0t2 (4e8)7,48s (3le)7,524 (498)6,104 (27 s)
E to NG Combo 16,043 (7 14)9,442 (402)I 1,280 (7 t4)8,513 (420)
E to NG Wall
Heater 10,932 (466)t0,624 (4s2)10,624 (466)NA NA
t\4EIUORANDUIV
March 29,2019
To: Amber Gifford; Avista Utilities
From: Evaluation Team
Re: Fuel Efficiency Measure-Level Savings Estimates
This memo presents estimated measure-level savings for the Fuel Efficiency program
The evaluation team conducted a difference in differences regression analysis to estimate impacts
for the electric Fuel Efficiency program for the 2016-2017 biennium. While the regression analysis
did not support a measure-level analysis due to lack of available sample for certain measures and
associated wide error bounds, the evaluation team did attempt to estimate impacts using a load
disaggregation analysis. End use shares sourced primarily from the Residential Building Stock
Assessment (RBSA) were applied to participant consumption to estimate the measure level impacts
presented in Table 0-1. For comparison purposes, the end use shares are equivalent to the percent
impacts found as part of the 2014-2015 evaluation activities. The estimated savings are based on an
annual consumption value of 16,062 kWh, which is derived from the 2016-2017 program
participants.
Table 0-1: Estimated Fuel Efficie Measure-Level Im
E Electric To Natural Gas Furnace
E Electric To Natural Gas Fumace & Water Heat
E Electric To Natural Gas Wall Heater
E Electric To Natural Gas Water Heater
E Multifamily Electric to Natural Gas Furnace
AVU-E-18-12: Staff - 12 Supplemental Aftachment A
Nexant | 867 Coal Creek Circle, Suite 120 | Louisville, CO 80027 | USA I Tel: [phone]
Copyright 2015, Nexant, lnc.
oNo@nT
38.0%6,104
s3.0%8,513
7.60/o 1,221
15.Oo/o 2,409
26.60/o 4,273
End Use Share/
Percent lmpact
Estimated
Savings per
measure
Measure
AVISTA CORPORATION
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR INFORMATION
JURISDICTION
CASE NO:
REQUESTER:
TYPE:
REQUEST NO.:
IDAHO
AVU-E-18-12
IPUC Staff
Production Request
Staff - 13 Supplemental
DATE PREPARED
WITNESS:
RESPONDER:
DEPARTMENT:
TELEPHONE:
0312512019
N/A
Amber Gifford
Energy Efficiency
(509) 49s-2896
REQUEST:
What is the increase in the number of Therms of natural gas consumed by customers who
participated in the Company's fuel efficiency program (Converted their HVAC and other
appliances to Natural Gas)? What is the average net savings, in dollars, of customers who
participated in this program?
RESPONSE:
As is reported in Nexant's2016-2017 Natural Gas Impact Evaluation, the increase to the
number of therms used by residential customers due to the Company's Fuel Efficiency
Program in 20L7 was 82,948 (verified gross)r. For the 2016 program year, the increase was
350,976 therms (unverified - adjusted reported gross)2
Avista does not record the billing impact of a conversion on a per customer basis, however,
the Company could calculate an estimated annual net savings value based on an average of
electric and natural gas rates for a particular period of time.
SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE (03 125 12019',1:
The below information is intended to provide fuither clarification regarding the negative
therm values from Avista's Fuel Efficiency Program:
1. Table 3-7 inthe 2017 Annual Report states negative 118,905 therms for the Fuel
Conversion Program, which are the reported values without the realization rates
applied. This table should have presented the negative 82,948 verified gross value as
reported in Table 5-15 of the 2016-2017 Natural Gas Impact Evaluation.
2. The 70o/o realization rate found in Table 5-15 of the Natural Gas Impact Evaluation
suggests that Avista over-estimated the negative impact to therm savings or "gas
penalty" of conversion projects.
In addition, the following information outlines the conclusions and recommendation
identified in Nexant's 2016-2017 Natural Gas Impact Evaluation Report, with respect to the
Fuel Efficiency Program3 :
Conclusion: The evaluation team found that the homes analyzed that converted from
electric heat to a natural gas furnace showed an average weather normalized gas
I Idaho 2016-2017 Natural Gas Impact Evaluation, Table 5- l5
2ldaho 2016 Annual Conservation Report, Table 3-7.
3 Idaho 2016-2017 Natural Gas Impact Evaluation, pg. 87.
consumption increase of 328 therms per year, resulting in a 70o/o realization rate. This
impact andreahzation rate is very similar to findings from the prior evaluation (384 therms
increased consumption with a7lYo realization rate).
Recommendation The evaluation team recommends Avista review its forecasted gas
penalty for the Fuel Efficiency Program. Based on two cycles of evaluation, the program
appears to be over-estimating the actual impact.
Avista's response to Nexant's above recommendation was to adjust the savings values for the
2019 program year onward, in accordance with Nexant's report. Please refer to Staf{_PR_l2
Supplemental for a table that identifies historically savings values for the Fuel Efficiency
Program.
AVISTA CORPORATION
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR INFORMATION
JURISDICTION
CASE NO:
REQUESTER:
TYPE:
REQUEST NO.:
IDAHO
AVU-E-18-12
IPUC Staff
Production Request
Staff - l4 Supplemental
DATE PREPARED: 0312512019WITNESS: N/A
RESPONDER: Amber Gifford
DEPARTMENT: Energy Efficiency
TELEPHONE: (s09) 49s-2896
REQUEST:
Exhibit l, Section 5.7 indicates that the Company's Shell program realizationratewas 27oh.
What steps are the Company taking to improve the accuracy of the methodology used to
estimate this program's savings?
RESPONSE:
Avista will begin using Regional Technical Forum (RTF) savings values in 2019 for all shell
measures in the residential prescriptive portfolio.
SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE (03 125 12019)z
In response to Nexant's recommendation regarding the residential shell program, the
Company updated its savings values based on the most up-to-date residential weatherization
workbook available on the RTF's website (ResSFWx_v3_7). The development of the UES
value for shell measures incorporated both insulation upgrades and insulation installation
measures, with savings based on homes with R0 and Rl1 insulation upgrading to R38 and
R48 insulation. In addition, the Company ultimately used as their UES value an average of the
individual measure applications, which did not individually separate electric heating type
(Electric FAF, Heat Pump,Zonal or DHP).
Another measure included in the residential shell program are window upgrades. The
program requires that customers install windows that are Class 30 or higher. Using the RTF
ResSFWx_v3_7 workbook, the Company also updated its UES values for windows. Like
insulation measures, the Company averaged the savings for Electric FAF and ZonallDHP.
Avista recognizes that more accuracy could be achieved if individual offerings were created
based on the customer's heating system, however, we view that approach as a detriment to
customers and feel it is in the customers benefit to use an averaged approach.
The Company also implemented its "most favorable fuel" rule for its Energy Efficiency Shell
Program beginning in2019, which allows individual measures to be rebated at the higher of
the electric and gas incentive amounts. The Company anticipates that the residential shell
program will have more throughput in2019 than it had in the previous years, which will lead
to a larger sample population for future evaluations.
AVISTA CORPORATION
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR INFORMATION
JUzuSDICTION:
CASE NO:
REQUESTER:
TYPE:
REQUEST NO.:
IDAHO
AVU-E- 18- 12
IPUC Staff
Production Request
Staff - 22 Supplemental
DATE PREPARED
WITNESS:
RESPONDER:
DEPARTMENT:
TELEPHONE:
03125120t9
N/A
Amber Gifford
Energy Efficiency
(s}e) 4es-28e6
REQUEST:
Please provide the technical manual(s) used to estimate DSM energy efficiency savings for
2016 and2017.
RESPONSE:
Please see StaflPR_z2 - Attachment A for 2016 unit energy savings and Staff PP.-22 -
Attachment B for unit energy savings.
SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE (03 125 12019)z
Per a conference call with IPUC Staff on 0312112019, clarification was provided around this
request, making clear that Avista is being asked to provide a technical manual listing the
procedures, policies, and guidance that identifies how savings are estimated for all site specific
projects.
As all site specific projects are custom and unique in nature, no technical manual exists to support
this request. Each site specific project contains a full project documentation file that consists of
calculations, methodology, assumptions, etc.
Because of the nature of the specific request, Avista's Energy Efficiency Engineering Staff
proposes an in-person meeting with Staff at your offices to walk through any of our site specific
projects and corresponding documentation, with explanations, would be in order. This would also
give the engineering team a chance to review and explain how our internal processes are changing
given the implementation of iEnergy, our new Energy Efficiency database, and get Staff feedback
while we are designing new programs in the software. Three hours should suffice for project
samples and questions from Staff.