HomeMy WebLinkAbout20090115PAC to Staff 80.pdf~ROCKY MOUNTAINPOR
A DIISION OF PAflP RECE r: r~~L..;,; .s ~
201 South Main, Suite 2300
Salt Lake City, Uth 84111
2009 JAN t 5 AM 9: 52
Janua 14,2009
Scott Woodbur
Deputy Attorney General
Idaho Public Utilties Commssion
472 W Washington
Boise, ID 83702-5983
RE: P AC-E-08-07
IPUC_Production Data Request (68-101)
Please find enclosed an original and three copies of Rocky Mountain Power's Response to
IPUC _Production Data Request Number 80.
If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (801) 220-2963.
Sincerely,
ied NQt~
Ted Weston, Manger
Reguation
Enclosures
-,
PAC-E-08-07/Rocky Mountain Power
January 14,2009
IPUC Production Data Request 80
IPUC Production Data Request 80
On page 14, lines 19-21, of Jeff Bumgarer's pre-fied testimony is an estimate of
NEEA savings of 6,054 MWH in 2006 and 3,957 MWH in 2007 for Rocky
Mountain Power's Idaho service area. Please provide the assumptions and
calculations the Company and/or NEEA used to estimate those savings numbers
and any Rocky Mountain Power analyses of the veracity of those electricity,
savings and the value of such savings.
Response to IPUC Production Data Request 80
In seeking the specific detailed assumptions and calculations NEEA used to
estimate the reported savings noted in Jeffery W. Bumgarer's pre-fied testimony
it was discovered the 2007 savings figure reported was NEEA's estimate rather
than the final 2007 savings. The actual savings increased from 6,054 MWh in
2006 to 7,008 MWh in 2007. In order to assist Rocky Mountain Power (RMP) to
address how the timing of reporting impacted the development of testimony in
this case, Jeff Harris, Senior Planing Manager for NEEA provided the following
explanation of their data tracking and reporting procedures: "NEEA's standard
policy is to review on an anual and ongoing basis all energy savings tracking and
reporting for assumption and methodological soundness. Accordingly, NEEA
makes adjustments in reported savings to reflect the most 'up-to-date'
information. Furher, NEEA conducts these reviews using a conservative
perspective to ensure that the estimated savings will be reliable and available to
utilties to report. It is NEEA's goal to provide utilties with the most accurate,
reliable, and curent energy savings estimates for markets in which NEEA is
engaged. Many of NEE A's utility parners need estimates of savings before this
thorough review of assumptions can be completed. In order to accommodate this
need and upon request NEEA provides "preliminar" estimates of savings for a
given program year. These savings are then "trued up" after full review of
assumptions and data with "final" savings estimates. Historically, RMP has
requested these preliminar energy savings estimates fairly early in the process
each year which was the case in 2007. The time it took for NEEA to validate
anual savings and RMP's need for results early in 2007 resulted in the use of the
preliminar estimate rather than the final savings in the development of their
recent testimony. Furthermore, In July of2006, NEEA made a fairly large
downward adjustment to the 2005 preliminar savings. This adjustment was
based primarily on methodology and inputs associated with "baseline" energy
savings; i.e., savings that would have occured without any other utilty
intervention. This was paricularly the case for CFLs that make up the majority of
NEEA savings. This is the baseline assumption that Mr. Bumgarer references in
explaining the presumed drop in savings between his 2006 and 2007 reported
savings in his pre-filed testimony. Finally, it is important to note that the net
market-effects savings reported by NEEA are a function of market response
which is not always predictable.RMP's funding of NEE A however is based on a
..
P AC-E-08-07 /Rocky Mountain Power
January 14, 2009
IPUC Production Data Request 80
fixed formula that provides a consistent base of funds to allow the long-term
change that result in energy savings. Accordingly, from year-to year, there may
be increases or decreases in energy savings due to market changes that are
essentially independent of the Company's fuding contribution to NEEA in that
year."
In terms of the veracity and the value of the reported savings, RMP offers the
following explanation on NEEA's market transformation work. We recognize that
state specific verification of savings is preferred. However, NEEA reports savings
to fuding utilties and parners at a regional, not state leveL. To demonstrate how
Idaho customers are benefiting from NEEA' s work we requested NEEA to
provide the Company any analysis they had that was measured at a state specific
leveL. NEEA reported that two key residential programs were tracked by state and
collectively they account for 82% ofNEEA's total reported savings. The two
programs are Energy Star Lighting, which accounts for approximately 64% of the
total savings presented and Energy Star washing machines which account for
approximately 18%. The table below provides sales data in 2006 and 2007 for
CFLs and Energy Star washing machines, as well as Idaho's percentage of sales
when compared to the entire region.
2008 2007
Rel!ion Idaho % of Region Rel!ion Idaho % of Rel!ion
CFLs 10,751,906 1,206,374 11.2%18,943,754 2,323,432 12.3%
ES Washers 202,784 17,618 8.7%389,125 32,410 8.3%
According to the Association of Home Appliances Manufactures, Idaho accounts
for 10.5% of homes within the four state NEEA represented region. As noted in
the table, Idaho's percentage of CFL sales slightly exceeds that of its household
percentage rate in the region while for Energy Star washing machines the
percentage is slightly lower. On average, the sales data in Idaho closely
resembles the states portion of regional households.
The value of the savings to PacifiCorp were noted within Mr. Bumgarer's pre-
fied testimony. NEEA's cost-effectiveness analysis work reports energy
effciency savings at a levelized cost ofless than $.01 per kWh while utilties
maintain cost-effectiveness ratios in their programs at levelized costs in the range
of $.03-$.04 per kWh. NEEA's methodology for determining the savings from
their effects, and netting out the effects of utilty program, has been vetted and is
supported by the regional utilties funding NEEA's work.