20100729PAC to IIPA 54-56, 59-63, etc.pdf

~~OUAIN
July 28, 2010
Eric L. Olsen ISB# 4811
RACIN, OLSON, NYE, BUDGE &
BAILEY, C~TERED
PD. Box 1391; 201 E. Center
Pocatello, Idao 83204-1391
RE: ID PAC-E-10-07
LIP A Data Request (54-66)
or,r.~l'.~-~.
iaHl JUl29 AM 9: 2 t
\ÐAtlC¡! ITII niCSu it-I i .-=.
201 South Mai. Suite 2300
Salt Lake City. Uth 84111
Please find enclosed Rocky Mountai Power's responses to IIPA Data Requests 54-56, 59-63,
and 65-66. The remaig responses will be provided separately. Provided on the enclosed CD
is Attchment LIP A 54. Provided on the enclosed Confdential CD is Confdential Attchment
LIP A 61. The Confdential Attchment is Confdential and is provided to paries tht have signed
a protective order in ths docket.
If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at [phone].
Sincerely,
J. Ud Ú/~/~
J. Ted Weston
Manager, Reguation
Enclosure:
C.c. Randy BudgelMonsanto
Michael C. Creamer/ Agrum
Jea JewelllUC
Anthony Yanel
Ben Ot
P AC-E-1 0-07/Rocky Mountan Power
July 28, 2010
LIP A Data Request 54
LIP A Data Request 54
With respect to lIP A Data Request 12, inormation was not requested by
individua customer. Please provide the requested inormation on an aggregated
or system basis.
Response to lIP A Data Request 54
PacifiCorp has only two interrptible customers outside of Idaho. Providing the
requested inormation on an aggregated or system basis does not protect customer
specific inormation and canot be provided without the consent from US
Magnesium and Nucor.
Recordho1der:
Sponsor:
Peter C. Eelkema
Peter C. Eelkema
PAC-E-10-07/Rocky Mounta Power
July 28, 2010
LIP A Data Request 55
LIP A Data Request 55
Regarding the data provided in response to LIP A Data Requests 33a and 33b,
please provide the following:
A. Wht level are the values listed at (Generation, Transmission, Sales, etc.)?
B. Assumg tht these values were the actu levels served, pleas provide in
electronic format the level of interrption and/or curlment that took
place durng each hour.
C. Is it possible to add all values for a given month and come up with the
published monthly energy figues or does some adjusent need to be
made? Please specify.
Response to lIP A Data Request 55
A. The hourly values are listed at generation.
B. Test year actul sales have not occured; therefore, the Company canot
report the level of interrption and/or curlment that took place each
hour.
C. Adding up the hourly loads by month will yield the monthy loads (at the
generator). Adding Demand Side Management back to the loads and
subtracting line losses will yield the monthy saes level (at the customer
meter). There are no adjustments other th Demand Side Manement
and line losses.
Recordholder:
Sponsor:
Peter C. Eelkema
Peter C. Ee1kema
P AC-E-1 0-07/Rocky Mountai Power
July 28,2010
LIP A Data Request 56
LIP A Data Request 56
The response to lIP A Data Request 3 included sum data for Irgation
customers which was a 5 year average for (presumably) the average customer.
Please provide the actu load research inormation by sample customer for the
Irgation class for each of these five years as wa provided for the other customer.
classes as listed in the response to Request 3.
Response to lIP A Data Request 56
Please refer to Attchment LIP A 56.
Note: The MV90 Load Research System used to calculate class averages and
class loads does not save the individual customer data used to generte the class
averages and class loads in a dedicated area. Only the class averages and class
loads are saved. The individua customer data can be accessed by multiple
pares, creatig the possibilty of customer interval data being chaged or
corrpted. It is therefore extemely diffcult to go back in time and attempt to
generate anew the class averages from the individual customer data. Even
rounding errors will prevent an exact calculation.
Recordholder:
Sponsor:
Scott Thornton
C. Craig Paice
PAC-E-10-07/Rocky Mountan Power
July 28,2010
IIPA Data Request 59
LIP A Data Request 59
Regarding the tab labeled "Adjfactors" in the Company's response to IIPA
request 3, please explai how the following figues are calculated and/or what
they represent:
A. kWh sample
B. Pricing kWh
C. Fore. kWh
Response to lIP A Data Request 59
A. kWh Sample refers to those estimates of kWh derived from the sample load
data. The data is derived using exactly the same methodology as tht
employed to derive demand estimates. On the referenced tab, these values can
be found on the rows labeled il RES 01, ID RES 36, ID GS 06S, ID GS 23S
and il IRR A V.
B. Pricing kWh refers to actu biled energy afer adjustment for unbiled kWh
and other adjustments necessar to convert ths data into approxiate calenda
month blocks.
C. Fore. kWh refers to energy estimates provided by the load and revenue
forecastig deparent. These estimates reflect norm weather based on a
20-year average actu weather history.
Recordholder:
Sponsor:
Scott Thornton
C. Crag Paice
PAC-E-10-07/Rocky Mounta Power
July 28,2010
LIP A Data Request 60
lIP A Data Request 60
The response to lIP A Data Request 6 indicated that new strata boundares for the
Irgation class were determed in 2008-2009. Please explain (if a new sample
was not developed) which sample customers (by sample number or some other
identification process) were associated with each of the previous four strata and
which are now associated with each of the present three strata.
Response to lIP A Data Request 60
A new irrgation sample was put in place prior to the 2008 irgation season.
Recordholder:
Sponsor:
Scott Thornton
C. Craig Paice
PAC-E-1O-07/Rocky Mounta Power
July 28, 2010
LIP A Data Request 61
LIP A Data Request 61
The response to lIP A Data Request 7 contaed by rate schedule the weather
normalized chage in kWh usage and the price of those kWh. Please provide (a)
the "normal weather" values, the difference from "normal" that had to be
normalized, and (b) the equations and/or assumptions used to establish the prices
used in that response.
Response to lIP A Data Request 61
a. Different weather varables are used to weather normalize residential and
commercial sales. Therefore, normal weather values will be different for
residential and commercial classes. Please refer to Confdential Attachment
lIP A 61 for the 2009 normal weather values and the 2009 deviation (normal
minus actual) from normal weather. Confdential information is provided
subject to the terms and conditions of the protective agreement in this
proceeding.
b. The prices in the response were the actu energy prices from the Company's
Idaho taf schedules in the historic period. There were no equations or
assumptions used to establish the prices used in that response.
Recordholder:
Sponsor:
Romita Biswas / James Zhang
Wiliam R. Grffth
.P AC-E-1 0-07/Rocky Mountan Power
July 28, 2010
LIP A Data Request 62
LIP A Data Request 62
The response to lIP A Data Request 16a indicates that base year load
measurements and estimates were adjusted to match test year energy. Does
ths mean that a ratio is established between a given monthy demand figue for
a given rate schedule and the monthy energy, and then that ratio is simply
applied to the new test year energy level?
Response to lIP A Data Request 62
Yes, using the following equation:
xf --yf
yb *xb
Where:x = demand (kW) estimates by month
y = energy (kWh) estimates by month
f= test year
b = base year
Recordholder:
Sponsor:
C. Craig Paice / Scott D. Thornton
C. Crag Paice
PAC-E-10-07/Rocky Mountain Power
July 28, 2010
IIPA Data Request 63
LIP A Data Request 63
The response to lIP A Data Request 16b indicates that the irrgation curlment is
based upon a five year average. Please supply for each month the specific averages
that went into makng up the five year average curilment that was used.
Response to lIP A Data Request 63
As explained in the response to lIP A Data Request 16b, the impact of the load
curlment program is reflected in the five year average data. The level of
curlment is based on this five year average and does not represent any individua
year or any specific curlment amounts. As such, the averages that.went into
makng up the five year average curlment are embedded in the five year averge
load research data which was provided in Attch LIP A Data Request 3 and are not
separately available.
Recordholder:
Sponsor:
C. Craig Paice / Scott Thornton
C. Craig Paice
P AC-E-1 0-07/Rocky Mountain Power
July 28,2010
LIP A Data Request 65
LIP A Data Request 65
With respect to the Response to lIP A Request 38,. please answer the followig:
A. With respect to tab "EstNCP's" of the spreasheet, at cell G27 the June
2009 value for the Irrgators is 349,732. Wht is meant by the NCP value,
how was ths value derived, and how does it relate to the June values listed
tabs "NCP1","NCP2", and "NCP3"?
B. With respect to tab "EstNCP's" of the spreadheet, at cell G27 the June
2009 value for the Irrgators is 349,732. How is ths value for 2009
incorporated into the class cost of service study in ths case?
C. With respect to tab "NCP3" of the spreadsheet, at cell G27 the June 2008
value for the Irgators is 454,766. How is ths value ultimately
incorporated into the class cost of service study in ths case?
D. With respect to tab "NCP3" of the spreadsheet, at cell G27 the June 2008
value for the Irrgators is 454,766. How is ths value derived/calculated?
E. With respect to tab "NCP3" of the spreadsheet the 2008 values on line 27
for the Irgators totas 1,760,244. How does ths value relate to the values
ofkW biling for 2008 for the Irgators of only 1,323,028 found in the
Compay's response to lIP A Request 26? We are seekig a reconcilation
of the vas difference in these two values.
F. With respect to tab "RateSch" of the spreadsheet, at cell G27 the June
2009 value for the Irgators is 286,224. Wht is meat by ths schedule
pea value, how was ths value derived, and how does it relate to the June.
values listed tabs
"RateSch1 ",."RateSch2", and "RateSch3"?
G. With respet to tab "RateSch" of the spreadsheet, at cell G27 the June
2009 value for the Irgators is 286,224. How is ths value for 2009
incorporated into thè class cost of service study in ths case?
H. With respect to tab "RateSch" of the spreasheet, at cell G27 the June
2009 value for the Irgators is 286,224. How is ths value
derved/calculated?
Response to lI A Data Request 65
A. Th value of 349,732 is the irgaon non-coincident pea value for June
2009. Ths value was este ba on a 3 yr. NCP/Schedule Pea
ratio. The corrspndig values list on tabs ''NCP1'', ''NCP2'', and
P AC-E-1 0-07/Rocky Mountain Power
July 28,2010
LIP A Data Request 65
''NCP3'' are non-coincident values for the years 2006-2008 used in the 3
yr. ratio used to estimate 2009.
B. The June 2009 non-coincident peak (NCP) for Schedule 10 is 349,732 at
sales leveL. Ths value is adjusted to input level by applying a secondar
loss factor of11.642% (please refer to Attachment IIPA 45) to equa
390,448 as shown in Exhbit No. 49, Tab 5, page 10, lines 17 and 23 and
page 13, lines 21-22.
C. The value of 454,766 is the June 2008 NCP for Schedule 10 (at sales) and
is one of thee actu NCP values used to calculate the thee year average
of 349,732 for the month of June 2009 (please refer to the response to item
A. above). The response to item B. above describes how this value is
incorporated in the cost of service study.
D. Ths value was derived from the 2008 Irgation Sample.
2008 Irrg. Sample NCP A vg/Cust. Irrgation Population NCP Value95.7 X 4752 = 454,766
E. The value of 1,760,244 differs from the kW biling amount of 1,323,028
for the followig reasons:
1,760,244 = Sumation of 12 months
1,323,028 = Sumation of5 months
1,760,244 = Irgation Sample Derived
1,323,028 = Biling System Derived
1,760,244 = Based on Calendar Month
1,323,028 = Based on Biling Month
F. The value of 286,224 is the irgation rate schedule peak value for June
2009. Ths value was derived by scang the irrgation hourly class
loads, derived from the Irgation Sample, for that schedule's highest value
for the month. The correspondig values listed on tabs "RA TESCH 1 ",
"RATESCH2", and "RATESCH3" ar the rate schedule peak values for
the years 2006-2008.
G. The value of 286,224 is the June 2009 Rate Schedule Peak for Schedule
10 (at saes) which is multiplied by the thee year NCP to Rate Schedule
Pea ratio of 1.221884 to derive the June 2009 NCP of 349,732 (please
refer to the response to item A. above). The response to item B. above
describes how ths value is incorpraed in the cost of service stuy.
H. The value of 286,224 is the irgation rate schedule pea value for June
2009. Ths value was derived by scg the irrgation hourly class
load, derived frm the Irgation Sample,. for tht schedule's highest value
for the month.
PAC-E-10-07/Rocky Mountain Power
July 28, 2010
LIP A Data Request 65
Recordholder:
Sponsor:
C. Craig Paice I Scott Thornton
C. Craig Paice
P AC-E-1 0-07/Rocky Mountain Power
July 28,2010
LIP A Data Request 66
LIP A Data Request 66
With respect to the Response to lIP A Request 40, par "c" asked for the time and
date of each substations monthy peak. If ths inormation is available, please
provide it. It ths information is not available, please so indicate.
Response to lIP A Data Request 66
The requested information is not readily available and would be burdensome to
collect.
Ftecordholder: NI A
Sponsor: NI A