200912282009 IRP Appendix B - DSM 2008 Report.pdf

IPC-E-09-33
,,'.,'"\. ,..~#";; ):¡
rv
C0N
esIDA~POR~
An IDACORP Company
."~.,
This document printed on recycled paper.
Idaho Power Company Table of Contents
CONTENTS
Table of Contents............................................ ............................................................................................. i
List of Tables ............................................................................................................................................. iii
List of Figures ............. ........ .......... ........... .............. ................ ... ..................... ........................ .......... .......... iii
Glossary of Acronyms ... .......... .................... ................... .... .................. .................. ........................ ........... iv
Executive Summary ........... ...... .... .... .......... ...... ........ ........................ ................................. ............. ..............1
Introduction..................................................................................................................................................3
DSM Program Portfolio Structure ...... ........ .......... ......... ......... ......... ......................................................5
Program Performance ............................................................................................................................6
Regulatory Initiatives .............................. .... ........ ........... ....... ................... ...... ........ .... ... ............. ............8
DSM Expenditures and Funding...................... ......... ..... ............. ........ .... ......................... .......... ............8
Future Plans ...........................................................................................................................................9
Customer Satisfaction ............................................................................................................................9
Cost-Effectiveness ...............................................................................................................................11
DSM Annual Report Structure.............................................................................................................12
Residential Sector Overview........ .... .... ................................... ........ ... .................... .............. ......................13
Description ...... ....... .... ......................... ......................... ............................ ...................... ......................13
Programs......................................................................................................................... .................... .13
AlC Cool Credit ............. .................... .... ....... ........... ............. ............. ............................................15
Attic Insulation Pilot............................................:....................................................................... ..18
Energy Efficient Lighting ................................... ....... ............... ........ .............................................19
Energy House Calls. ... ............. ..... ....................... ......... ............. .................. ...................................21
ENERGY STAR\I Homes Northwest ............................................................................................23
Heating & Cooling Efficiency Program .............................. ..........................................................26
Home Products Program ................ .... .... .......... ........... ....... ................................................ ............29
Home Weatherization Pilot............................................................................................................31
Oregon Residential Weatherization...............................................................................................3 3
Rebate Advantage ..........................................................................................................................35
Weatherization Assistance for Qualified Customers .....................................................................37
Commercial/Industral Sector Overview ...................................................................................................39
Description.................................................................................................................... .......................39
Programs ..............................................................................................................................................39
Building Efficiency ........................................................................................................................41
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page i
T able of Contents Idaho Power Company
Custom Efficiency .........................................................................................................................43
Easy Upgrades ...............................................................................................................................46
Holiday Lighting Program .............................................................................................................49
Oregon Commercial Audits. ........ ........ ............ ......... .... ........ ......... ... ................... ..........................51
Irrgation Sector Overview ........................................................................................................................53
Description...........................................................................................................................................53
Programs ..............................................................................................................................................53
Irigation Peak Rewards.................................................................................................................54
Irigation Efficiency Rewards .... ....................... ........................... .......... ........ ................................56
Market Transformation .. .......... .... ............... ........ ......... ........ ......................................................................59
Northwest Energy Efficiency Allance (NEEA)..................................................................................59
NEEA Activities.. ....... ......................... .............. ................ ..................... .......... ............. ........ ........59
NEEA Funding...............................................................................................................................61
Energy Effciency Advisory Group (EEAG) ................ ................ ...... ............... ....................... .................63
EEAG Program Recommendations .....................................................................................................63
Residential Programs ...........................................................................................................................63
Commercial and Industrial Programs ..................................................................................................65
Irgation Programs .... .... ........... ............................... ...................... ....... ........ ....................... ................67
Additional Topics Covered ..................................................................................................................67
Other Programs and Activities...................................................................................................................69
Residential Energy Efficiency Education Initiative.............................................................................69
Commercial Education Initiative ......................................................................................................... 70
Local Energy Efficiency Funds (LEE F) ............................................................................ .................. 70
Regulatory Initiatives................................................................................................................................. 71
Fixed-Cost Adjustment Pilot....... ................................................... ...................................... ................71
Performance-Based DSM Incentive Pilot............................................................................................71
Enhanced Commitment.............................................................................................................................. 73
Building Code Improvement Activity .................................................................................................74
Pursuit of Appliance Code Standards ..................................................................................................74
Continued Expansion ofDSM Programs Beyond Peak-Shaving/Load-Shifting Programs ................74
Third-Party Verification.......................................................................................................................75
Promotion of Energy Effciency through Electricity Rate Design ......................................................76
Idaho Power's Internal Energy Effciency Commitment....................................................................76
Appendices............................................................................................................................... ..................79
Page ii Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Table of Contents
Appendix 1. Idaho Rider, Oregon Rider, BPA, and NEEA Funding Balances..................................80
Appendix 2. 2008 DSM Expenses by Funding Source (Dollars) .......................................................81
Appendix 3. 2008 DSM Program Activity .........................................................................................82
Appendix 4. DSM Expense and Performance ....................................................................................85
Table 1.
Table 2.
Table 3.
Table 4.
Table 5.
Table 6.
Table 7.
Table 8.
Figure 1.
Figure 2.
Figure 3.
TABLES
2008 DSM Programs, Sectors, and Operational Type .............................. ...........................6
2008 Program Sector Summary and Energy Usage.............................................................8
2008 Funding Source and Energy Impact...........................................................................9
2008 Residential Program Summary ...... ..... ....... ............................ ......... ............ ..............13
Energy Efficient Lighting Energy Savings .................... ....................................................20
2008 Commercial/Industrial Program Summary............... ........................... ................... ..39
Custom Efficiency Annual Energy Savings by Measure...................................................44
2008 Irrgation Program Summary ....................................................................................53
OF FIG
DSM Incremental Expense History 2002-2008 (Milions of dollars).................................4
DSM Incremental Energy Savings 2002-2008 (Gigawatt-hour (GWh)) ............................4
Percent of Customers Whose Needs are Met or Exceeded by Idaho
Power's Conservation Efforts ............. ..... ..... .................... .................................................1 0
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page iii
Glossary of Acronyms Idaho Power Company
LOSSARY OF ACRONYMS
aMW-Average Megawatt
akW-Average Kilowatt
AlC-Air Conditioning
ACEEE-American Council for an Energy-Effcient Economy
ASHRAE-American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers
AMI-Advanced Metering Infrastrcture
B/C-Benefit Cost
BCA-Building Contractors Association
BEEP-Building Owners and Managers Association's Energy Efficiency Program
BETC-Business Energy Tax Credit
BLC-Basic Load Capacity
BOC-Boise Operations Center
BOMA-Building Owners and Managers Association
BP A-Bonneville Power Administration
BSU-Boise State University
CAC-Central Air Conditioning/Conditioners
CAP-Community Action Partership
CAP AI-Community Action Partnership Association of Idaho, Inc.
CCOA-Canyon County Organization on Aging and Community Services
CCNO-ommunity Connection of Northeast Oregon, Inc.
CEE-Consortium for Energy Efficiency Inc.
CFL-Compact Fluorescent Lighting
CHQ-orporate Headquarters (Idaho Power)
CR-Customer Representative
CSR-Customer Service Representatives
DEI-Distribution Efficiency Initiative
DOE-U.S. Departent of Energy
DSM-Demand Side Management
EEAG-Energy Efficiency Advisory Group
El-Ada-El-Ada Community Action Partership
EEBA-Energy and Environmental Building Association
EICAP-Eastern Idaho Community Action Partnership
ETa-Energy Trust of Oregon
Page iv Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Glossary of Acronyms
FCA-Fixed-Cost Adjustment
GWh-Gigawatt-hour
H&CE--Heating and Cooling Efficiency Program
HCSCS-Harney County Senior and Community Services Center
HMCAA-Harney-Malheur Community Action Agency
HV AC-Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning
HVR-Home Voltage Regulator
IDL-Integrated Design Lab
IEA-Industrial Effciency Alliance
IECC-International Energy Conservation Code
IESBP-Idaho ENERGY STAR\I Builders Partnership
IPUC-Idaho Public Utilities Commission
IRP-Integrated Resource Plan
kvar-Kilovolt ampere reactive
kW-Kilowatt
kWh-Kilowatt-hour
LDL-Lighting Design Lab
LED-Light-Emitting Diode
LEED-Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design
LEEF-Local Energy Efficiency Funds
LIHEAP-Low Income Home Energy Assistance Programs
MCOA-Malheur Council on Aging
MHAFB-Mountain Home Air Force Base
MW-Megawatt
MWh-Megawatt-hour
NEEM-Northwest Energy Efficient Manufactured Housing Program
NEEA-Northwest Energy Effciency Alliance
NWPCC-Northwest Power and Conservation Council
OER-Üffice of Energy Resources (formerly the Idaho Energy Division)
ODOE-Oregon Department of Energy
OPUC-Public Utility Commission of Oregon
PECI-Portland Energy Conservation, Inc.
PLC-Power Line Carrer
PTCS-Performance Tested Comfort System
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page v
Glossary of Acronyms Idaho Power Company
RFP-Request for Proposal
RTF-Regional Technical Forum
Rider-Idaho Energy Effciency Rider and Oregon Energy Effciency Rider
SCCAP-South Central Community Action Partnership
SEER-Seasonal Energy Efficiency Ratio
SEICAA-Southeastern Idaho Community Action Agency
SIR-Savings Investment Ratio
TAG-Technical Assessment Guide
TRC- Total Resource Cost
UC-Utility Cost
USB-Utility Sounding Board
WAQC-Weatherization Assistance for Qualified Customers
Page vi Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Executive Summary
SUM
Idaho Power's Demand-Side Management (DSM) 2008 Annual Report provides a review of its DSM
activities and finances throughout 2008, expresses its future plans for DSM activities, and satisfies
the reporting requirements set out in the Idaho Public Utilities Commission's (IPUC) Order No. 29419
and the Public Utility Commission of Oregon's (OPUC) Order No. 89-507.
Idaho Power considers energy effciency and demand response to be an important and necessary part of
a balanced approach to meeting the electricity needs of its customers. Energy effciency is recognized by
Idaho Power and its customers as providing economic, operational, and environmental benefits.
Therefore, the pursuit of all cost-effective demand-side resources is a primary objective for Idaho
Power. Idaho Power accomplishes this objective with input and consultation with its Energy Efficiency
Advisory Group (EEAG).
Idaho Power achieves energy and demand savings through four types of programs, 1) Energy Efficiency,
2) Demand Response, 3) Market Transformation, and 4) Other Programs and Activities. Idaho Power's
annual energy savings from 2002 through 2008 increased more than eight-fold. This increase was the
result of customers' participation in Idaho Power's energy effciency and demand response programs.
In 2008, these efficiency efforts saved 140,156 megawatt-hours (MWh) of electrcity, or 16 average
megawatts (aMW), enough energy to serve about 11,000 average homes for one year. The 2008 energy
savings was a 54% increase over the 91,145 MWh energy savings in 2007.
The demand reduction for Idaho Power's demand response programs increased by 20% from 48 MW in
2007 to 58 MW in 2008. By year-end 2008, participation in the AlC Cool Credit program increased by
72%. Total DSM expenses were slightly over $21 milion in 2008, which is a 35% increase over 2007
expenditures of$15.7 million.
In 2008, Idaho Power's energy effciency and demand response programs continue to increase in
number and customer participation. Idaho Power offered 16 energy effciency programs, two demand
response programs, and added three new programs, the Home Products program, the Home
Weatherization pilot, and the Attic Insulation pilot. Additional significant energy savings continue to be
realized through market transformation partnership activities with the Northwest Energy Efficiency
Alliance (NEEA).
Idaho Power was successful in providing customers with accurate and timely information to assist them
in making wise energy choices and participating in energy efficiency programs. In 2008, the results of
Idaho Power's quarterly customer satisfaction survey showed steady improvement over recent years,
as the percent of customers who have a positive perception of Idaho Power's energy efficiency efforts
has continued to rise.
The American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) annually publishes a scorecard that
ranks individual states in terms of commitment to energy efficiency. In 2008, the ACEEE identified
Idaho as the "most improved" state in the nation, having moved up 12 spots, compared to the 2007
scorecard. The following annual report provides detailed information on activities and programs
resulting from Idaho Power's support ofDSM initiatives.
Demand~Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 1
Executive Summary Idaho Power Company
This page left intentionally blank.
Page 2 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Introduction
INTRODUCTION
Idaho Power's Demand-Side Management (DSM) 2008 Annual Report provides a review of the financial
and operational performance ofIdaho Power's DSM activities and initiatives for the 2008 calendar year.
These programs provide a wide range of opportnities for all customer classes to balance their energy
needs and reduce their energy consumption.
Idaho Power considers energy effciency to be an important and necessary part of a balanced approach
to meeting the growing demand for electricity. Consistent with this view, energy effciency is one of
the cornerstones supporting Idaho Power's resource acquisition strategy. Energy efficiency is recognized
by Idaho Power and its customers as providing economic, operational, and environmental benefits.
Therefore, the pursuit of all cost-effective demand-side resources is a primary objective for Idaho
Power.
This DSM Annual Report is produced to convey Idaho Power's DSM activities and finances throughout
2008, to express Idaho Power's future plans for DSM activities, and to conform to the IPUC Order
No. 29419 and the OPUC Order No. 89-507.
Durng 2008, Idaho Power continued to expand the programs that began with the 2004 Integrated
Resource Plan (IRP). Idaho Power's 2006 IRP included the addition of three new DSM programs and
the expansion of one program. In addition to the DSM programs identified in the IRP, Idaho Power
continued to offer other energy effciency programs that began prior to the 2004 IR. Also in 2008,
Idaho Power continued to use its field staff in building customer awareness of, and participation in,
energy efficiency, demand response, and educational programs.
In 2008, the energy savings from Idaho Power's DSM activities increased by 54%, and the expenditures
for DSM-related activities increased by 35%, compared to 2007. This increase in spending included
increased participation in programs and the development of new programs that wil result in future
savings. DSM activities throughout 2008 were focused predominantly on increasing program
participation, customer education, and the planning and implementation of new programs.
Idaho Power's two main objectives for DSM programs are to acquire all cost-effective demand-side
resources in order to meet the electrical system's energy and demand needs and to provide all Idaho
Power customers with programs and information to help them manage their energy usage. Idaho Power
achieves these objectives through the development and implementation of programs with specific
energy, economic, and customer satisfaction objectives. When possible, Idaho Power implements
identical programs in its Idaho and Oregon service areas.
Figures 1 and 2 show the historical growth in expenditues and resource acquisition from 2002 to
the present.
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 3
Introduction Idaho Power Company
Figure 1. DSM Incremental Expense History 2002-2008 (Milions of dollars)
$25.00
$20.00-IIc
.2
i $15.00-
II
CDIIC
CDQ, $10.00)(w
:Eenc
$5.00
$0.00
$21.19
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Figure 2. DSM Incremental Energy Savings 2002-2008 (Gigawatt-hour (GWh))
160.00
140.00
:2
~ 120.00-
II
gi 100.00.~
eu
~ 80.00
e'
CD
if 60.00
40.00
20.00
140.16
0.00
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Idaho Power relies on input from the Energy Efficiency Advisory Group (EEAG) to provide customer
and public interest review ofDSM programs and expenses. In addition to the EEAG, Idaho Power
solicits further customer input through stakeholder groups in the residential, commercial, industral,
and irrgation customer sectors. Idaho Power also has enhanced relationships with trade allies,
Page 4 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Introduction
trade organizations, and regional groups committed to increasing the use of energy efficiency programs
and measures to reduce electricity load.
During 2008, Idaho Power continued its contractual participation in, and funding of, the Northwest
Energy Efficiency Alliance (NEEA). NEEA's efforts in the northwest impact Idaho Power's customers
by providing regional market transformation.
DSM re
The programs within the DSM portfolio are offered to four major customer sectors: residential,
commercial, industral, and irrigation. Beginning in 2007, the commercial and industrial energy
efficiency programs were made available to customers in either sector, expanding the availability of
these programs. Because of this change, the sector is now often referred to as the commercial/industral
sector. Idaho Power achieved energy and demand savings through four types of programs.
These programs include Demand Response, Energy Efficiency, Market Transformation, and Other
Programs and Activities. A brief description of each of these operational categories follows.
Response
Demand response programs are designed to reduce participant electrcity loads at specific times of
the day and year when electricity is normally in short supply. The need for these programs continues to
increase. Idaho Power set a new system peak of3,214 megawatts (MW) on Monday, June 30, 2008,
at 3:00 p.m. The goal of demand response programs within Idaho Power's DSM portfolio is to reduce
the system summer peak demand, thus minimizing the need for acquiring higher-cost, supply-side
alternatives, such as gas turbine generation. Demand reduction through demand response programs is
usually achieved through the use of load control devices installed on customer equipment. The measure
of program performance is the number of megawatts (MW) of reduced demand for electricity during
peak periods. In 2008, Idaho Power offered two demand response programs, one for residential
customers and one for irrigation customers.
Energy effciency programs focus on reducing energy usage through identifying buildings, equipment,
or components where energy-efficient design, replacement, or repair can yield significant energy
savings. These programs are applicable to all customer sectors. Typical project measures range from
entire building constrction to simple light bulb replacement. Savings from these programs are measured
in terms of reduced kilowatt-hour (kWh) usage, or megawatt-hour (MWh) usage for larger projects.
These programs usually supply energy benefits throughout the year. Idaho Power's energy efficiency
offerings include programs in residential and commercial new constrction, residential and commercial
retrofit applications, and irrgation and industral systems improvement or replacement.
Market transformation is a method of achieving energy savings through engaging and influencing large
national and regional organizations. These organizations are in a position to impact the design of energy
usage in products, services, and methods that affect electrcal power consumption. Idaho Power
primarily achieves market transformation savings through its participation in NEEA. Idaho Power also
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 5
Introduction Idaho Power Company
supports market transformation accomplished by appliance or building code modifications or
enforcement.
and
Other Programs and Activities represent a range of small projects that are tyically research,
development, and education oriented. This category includes the Local Energy Efficiency Funds
(LEEF), the Residential Energy Efficiency Education initiative, and the Commercial Educational
Initiative. These programs enable Idaho Power to offer support for projects and educational
opportnities not normally covered under existing programs.
Table 1 provides a summary of the DSM programs and their respective sectors, as well as operational
category and the state in which each was available in 2008.
Table 1. 2008 DSM Programs, Sectors, and Operational Type
Program
AlC Cool Credit
Attic Insulation Pilot
Building Efficiency
Commercial Education Initiative
Custom Efficiency
Easy Upgrades
Energy Effcient Lighting
Energy House Calls
ENERGY STAR'" Homes Northwest
Heating & Cooling Efficiency Program
Holiday Lighting Program
Home Products Program
Home Weatherization Pilot
Irrigation Efficiency Rewards
Irrigation Peak Rewards
Local Energy Effciency Funds
Northwest Energy Effciency Alliance
Oregon Commercial Audits
Oregon Residential Weatherization
Rebate Advantage
Residential Education Initiative
Weatherization Assistance for
Qualified Customers
Sector
Residential
Residential
Commercialllndustrial
Commercial/Industrial
Commercial/Industrial
Commercial/Industrial
Residential
Residential
Residential
Residential
Commercialllndustrial
Residential
Residential
Irrigation
Irrigation
All
All
Commercial/Industrial
Residential
Residential
Residential
Residential
Operational Type
Demand Response
Energy Effciency
Energy Effciency
Other Programs and Activities
Energy Efficiency
Energy Efficiency
Energy Efficiency
Energy Efficiency
Energy Effciency
Energy Effciency
Energy Effciency
Energy Effciency
Energy Effciency
Energy Effciency
Demand Response
Other Programs and Activities
Market Transformation
Energy Effciency
Energy Efficiency
Energy Efficiency
Other Programs and Activities
Energy Efficiency
State
ID
ID
ID/OR
ID/OR
ID/OR
ID/OR
ID/OR
ID/OR
tD/OR
ID/OR
ID/OR
ID/OR
ID
ID/OR
ID/OR
ID/OR
ID/OR
OR
OR
tD/OR
ID/OR
ID/OR
Participation in DSM programs at Idaho Power continues to increase, as does the energy impact in
the form of energy savings and demand reduction. The energy savings for Idaho Power's energy
efficiency programs in 2008 was 107,484 MWh, a 72% increase over the 62,544 MWh energy savings
in 2007. Demand reduction for the demand response programs also increased in 2008. Combined,
Page 6 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Introduction
the Irrgation Peak Rewards and AlC Cool Credit programs resulted in estimated summer peak reduction
of 58 MW, which represented a 20% increase over 48 MW in 2007.
In 2008, energy savings increased, as compared to 2007, for the residential, commercial, and industral
sectors by 75%, 3l0%, and 38% respectively. The residential sector savings increased to 21,778 MWh,
the commercial sector savings increased to 32,786 MWh, and the industrial sector increased to
41,059 MWh. The 2008 irrgation sector energy savings decreased slightly to 11,746 MWh, from
12,304 MWh in 2007. Additional energy savings continue to be realized through market transformation
parership activities with NEEA.
Customer participation increased in nearly every existing program from 2007 to 2008. The number of
projects completed under the Easy Upgrades program increased from 104 projects in 2007 to
685 projects in 2008. Projects completed under the Building Efficiency program increased
from 22 to 60. While the energy savings decreased slightly from the Irgation Effciency Rewards
program, participation increased from 816 to 961 projects. As a result of the downtu in the housing
market in 2008, the number of homes incented under the ENERGY STAR\I Homes Northwest and
the Rebate Advantage programs both decreased. Participation in the AlC Cool Credit program increased
by 72% to approximately 24,000 customers by year's end.
A few individual programs were big contrbutors to the overall energy savings. The Custom Efficiency
program, the only energy effciency program in the industral sector, accounted for 38% of Idaho
Power's energy savings from programs, resulting in 41,059 MWh of savings. The Easy Upgrades
program in the commercial sector provided 24%, or 25,928 MWh, energy savings. In the residential
sector, the Energy Efficient Lighting program saved 14,309 MWh, accounting for 13% of the overall
energy savings.
ACEEE publishes an annual scorecard ranking individual states in terms of commitment to energy
effciency. In 2008, Idaho was identified as the "most improved" state in the nation, having moved up
12 spots, as compared to the 2007 scorecard. As the largest utility company in the state, Idaho Power is
proud to contribute to this recognition.
Table 2 shows the 2008 annual energy savings, summer peak demand reduction, and average megawatt
(aMW) savings associated with each of the DSM program categories. The table also provides
a comparison of the 2008 contribution of each sector in terms of weather-adjusted energy usage and its
respective size in number of customers. Unless otherwise noted, all energy savings presented in
this report are measured or estimated at the customer's meter, excluding line losses.
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 7
Introduction Idaho Power Company
Table 2. 2008 Program Sector Summary and Energy Usage
Energy Effciency Program Impacts(a)
MWh
Direct Energy aMWLoad Peak Load
Expenses Savings Reduction Reduction(b)
Energy Efficiency
Residential.............................. ..$7,192,562 21,778 2 23
Commercial............................. .$4,076,109 32,786 4 5
Industrial................. ......... ..... ....$4,045,671 41,059 5 5
Irrigation .. .................. .... ...... .....$3,535,542 11,746 1 39
Market Transformation ........ .....$942,014 32,671 4 n/a
Other Programs and Activities..$421,317 116 0 n/a
Total $20,213,215 140,156 16 72
.. .L -tem Sales
MWh %of
Sector Energy Number of
Total Usage Customers
5,282,337 36%404,373
3,979,113 27%64,125
3,365,761 23%122
1,921,608 13%18,542
n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a n/a
14,548,819 100%487,162
la) Energy, demand, and expense data have been rounded to the nearest whole unit, which may result in minor rounding differences.
(b) Includes peak load reduction from both demand response and energy effciency programs.
u In
Idaho Power has aligned itself with the IPUC and the members of the environmental community to work
toward creating a financial and regulatory environment supportive of utility DSM resource acquisition.
Resulting from this collaborative effort are two financial mechanisms designed to 1) remove the
financial disincentives to utility DSM resource acquisition and 2) provide a financial incentive to
share owners when DSM programs perform above baseline goals. Idaho Power is optimistic that
this effort wil lead to a sustained environment supportive of its plans to pursue all cost-effective DSM
opportnities while balancing its shareowner's financial objectives.
In response to these regulatory mechanisms, Idaho Power has committed to enhancing its efforts toward
promoting DSM and energy effciency in several key areas, including a broad availability of efficiency
and load-management programs, building code improvement activity, pursuit of appliance code
standards, expansion of DSM programs beyond peak shaving/load shifting programs, and third-party
verification.
DSM and Fundi
Funding for DSM programs in 2008 came from several sources. The Idaho Energy Efficiency Rider and
Oregon Energy Effciency Rider funds are collected directly from customers on their monthly bils.
In June 2008, the Idaho Rider was increased from a rate of 1.5% of base rate revenues to 2.5%. The
monthly caps on residential and irrgation customer contributions formerly in place were removed. The
Oregon Rider remains at 1.5% of base rate revenues. DSM-related expenses not funded through the
Rider funds, including costs for administration and overhead, are included as part of Idaho Power's
ongoing operation and maintenance costs. Total DSM expenses funded from these sources were slightly
over $21 milion in 2008.
Page 8 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Introduction
Table 3 provides a summary of the 2008 expenses and energy savings by each funding category.
Table 3. 2008 Funding Source and Energy Impact
Funding Source
Idaho Rider...........
Oregon Rider........
SPA......................
Idaho Power.........
Total
Expenses
$18,880,276
$625,000
$6,950
$1,681,294
$21,193,520
MWh Savings
131,662
4,277
o
4,217
140,156
p
Many of Idaho Power's DSM programs are selected for implementation through its biennial IRP.
The IR is a public document that details Idaho Power's strategy for economically maintaining
the adequacy of its power system into the future. The IR process balances risk, environmental,
economic, and other considerations ìn developing a preferred portfolio of future resources that meet
the specific energy needs of Idaho Power and its customers. The IRP is normally updated every
two years to reflect changes in supply costs, demand for electricity, and other factors. However, with its
acceptance of the 2006 IRP, the IPUC requested that Idaho Power align the submittal of its next IRP
with those submitted by other utilities. To comply with this request, Idaho Power provided an update on
the status ofthe 2006 IRP to both the IPUC and OPUC in June 2008, and wil file a new IRP in June
2009. Idaho Power DSM staffhas participated on the collaborative team compiling both the 2006 IRP
Update and the 2009 IRP.
In 2009, Idaho Power plans to continue to increase participation and energy savings from existing
programs and continue to implement new energy efficiency and demand response programs. In 2009,
Idaho Power plans to expand its efforts in energy efficiency by continuing the Attic Insulation Pilot
under the new name Home Improvement Program, continuing the Home Weatherization Pilot under the
new name Weatherization Solutions for Eligible Customers program, and implementìng a refrigerator
recycling program. Idaho Power will expand the Irrgation Peak Rewards program to add an optìon of a
dispatchable demand response program, which wil greatly increase the demand reduction potential from
this program. Also in 2009, Idaho Power plans to offer a demand response program to its commercial
and industrial customers through a third-party demand response aggregator.
Idaho Power will participate in the development of the Northwest Power and Conservation Council's
(NWPCC) Sixth Power Plan, continue and enhance consumer education on energy effciency,
and complete various research and development projects.
Customer satisfaction is a key consideration in Idaho Power's program design, operations, and
management. Idaho Power uses surveys, focus groups, stakeholder input, and input from the EEAG and
Idaho Power field personnel to assess and monitor customer satisfaction. This information and input aids
in the design and modification of programs and assists in program marketing and management
throughout the life of each program.
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 9
Introduction Idaho Power Company
In 2008, the results ofIdaho Power's quarterly customer satisfaction survey showed steady improvement
over recent years as the percentage of customers who have a positive perception ofIdaho Power's
energy effciency efforts has continued to increase. Customers' positive perception of Idaho Power's
energy efficiency efforts increased from 39% in early 2003 to 49% in late 2008. This represents a 26%
increase in positive customer perception. Idaho Power continues to expand its customer satisfaction
measurement activities, which enable Idaho Power to identify actionable areas for improvement. Figue
3 depicts biannual growth in the number of customers who indicated Idaho Power met or exceeded their
needs concerning energy conservation efforts encouraged by Idaho Power.
Figure 3. Percent of Customers Whose Needs are Met or Exceeded by Idaho Power's Conservation Efforts
Several surveys measured customer satisfaction with programs in 2008. The sureys also provide
guidance for program modification, marketing, and evaluation. Survey results are presented in
the following program sections of this report: AlC Cool Credit, Energy House Calls, Rebate Advantage,
Residential Energy Effciency Education, Heating & Cooling Efficiency Program, Weatherization
Assistance for Qualified Customers (W AQC), and Easy Upgrades.
An important measure of customer satisfaction is the retention rate of participants in ongoing programs.
A review of utility service agreement end dates indicates less than 1 % of A/C Cool Credit participants
cancel enrollment due to dissatisfaction with the program. Both irrgation sector programs, the Irgation
Peak Rewards and the Irigation Efficiency Rewards programs, have continued with a high level of
participation. Idaho Power programs have on-going customer satisfaction measurements as a follow-up
to the application process. For example, Easy Upgrades provides an ongoing Web-based customer
survey for its participants. Results of these sureys indicate general satisfaction and help guide program
improvement and marketing efforts. Idaho Power energy efficiency program staff is preparing surveys
for future use in determining customer satisfaction. Building Efficiency developed a customer
satisfaction survey in 2008 and plans to implement it in 2009. Custom Efficiency plans to develop a
customer satisfaction survey in 2009. The WAQC program collected customer satisfaction surveys from
participating customers. The results of these surveys showed that customers thought the program helped
Page 10 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Introduction
them learn about saving electricity in their homes and helped them try some of the ways to save energy
in their homes.
Idaho Power considers cost-effectiveness the primary screening tool prior to DSM program
implementation. Most of Idaho Power's energy efficiency programs are preliminarly identified through
the IRP planning process. In this process, specific programs or potential energy savings are screened by
sector to determine if the levelized cost of these programs is less than supply-side resource alternatives.
If they are shown to be less costly than supply-side resources from a levelized cost perspective,
the hourly shaped energy savings is subsequently included in the IRP.
Prior to the actual implementation of energy efficiency or demand response programs, Idaho Power
analytical staff creates cost-effectiveness models to assess whether a specific potential program design
wil be cost effective from the perspective of Idaho Power and its customers. Incorporated into
these models are inputs from various sources in order to use the most current and reliable information
available. When possible, Idaho Power staff leverages the experiences of other companies in the region,
or throughout the country, to help identify specific program parameters. This is typically accomplished
through discussions with other utilities' program managers and research staff. Idaho Power also uses
electric industry research organizations, such as E Source, Edison Electrical Institute (EEl), Consortium
for Energy Effciency (CEE), American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (ACEEE), Advanced
Load Control Alliance (ALCA), Association of Energy Service Professionals (AESP), Energy Insights,
and others, to identify similar programs and their results.
For other assumptions, including estimated costs, savings, and net-to-gross ratio estimates, Idaho Power
relies on sources such as the Northwest Power and Conservation Council, the Regional Technical Forum
(RTF), NEEA, E Source, the Database for Energy Efficiency Resources (DEER), the Energy Trust of
Oregon (ETO), Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), third-party consultants, and other regional
utilities. Idaho Power uses a cost-effectiveness model to perform sensitivity analyses in order to
determine optimal program designs. The remaining inputs used in the cost-effectiveness models are
obtained from the IRP process. The Technical Appendix ofIdaho Power's most recent IRP is the source
for the financial assumptions, including the discount rate and inflation rate. The IR is also the source of
the DSM alternative costs, which is the value of energy savings and demand reduction resulting from
the DSM programs. These DSM alternative costs vary by season and time-of-day. The DSM alternative
energy costs are based on either projected fuel costs of a peaking unit or forward market prices as
determined by Idaho Power's power supply model, AURORAxmp\I Electric Market ModeL.
The avoided capital cost is based on a gas-fired simple-cycle turbine.
For its cost-effectiveness methodology, Idaho Power relies on the Electrc Power Research Institute End
Use Technical Assessment Guide (TAG) and the California Standard Practice ManuaL. Idaho Power
primarily uses the Total Resource Cost (TRC) test and the Utility Cost (UC) test to develop benefit cost
(B/C) ratios to determine the cost-effectiveness ofDSM programs. As defined in the TAG and
California Standard Practice Manual, the TRC and UC tests are most similar to supply-side tests and
provide a useful basis to compare demand-side and supply-side resources. Idaho Power determines
cost-effectiveness on a measure-by-measure basis and a program basis. To be consistent with the IR,
program life B/C ratios for AlC Cool Credit and Irgation Peak Rewards are calculated over a 20-year
period. In order for a measure or a program to be considered cost-effective, it must have B/C ratios
greater than one for both the TRC and UC tests.
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 11
Introduction Idaho Power Company
Idaho Power may choose to launch a pilot or a program to evaluate estimates or assumptions in
the cost-effectiveness modeL. Following implementation of a program, cost-effectiveness models are
reviewed as new inputs from actual program activity become available, such as actual program
expenses, savings, or participation. If measures or programs are determined to not be cost-effective after
implementation, the program or measures are reexamined.
A new addition to the 2008 DSM report is the presentation in Appendix 4 of the UC and TRC B/C ratios
using actual cost information over the life of the program through 2008. These B/C ratios are provided
as a measure of cost-effectiveness for all Idaho Power energy efficiency or demand response programs
currently being offered where energy savings and demand reduction is realized.
Program evaluation is an important facet of Idaho Power's DSM operational activities. Idaho Power
relies on evaluation by third-party contractors, internal analyses, and regional studies to ensure the
ongoing cost-effectiveness of programs through validation of energy savings and demand reduction.
The results ofIdaho Power's evaluation efforts are used to enhance or initiate program changes when
warranted. In 2008, Idaho Power developed a comprehensive evaluation plan for its energy effciency
programs and commenced evaluations for several programs and measures, including Building
Efficiency, ENERGY STAR\I Homes Northwest, Rebate Advantage, Energy House Calls, and the Attic
Insulation pilot.
As part of its evaluation efforts, Idaho Power is actively participating in several regional studies to
identify and promote emerging technologies that may further enhance opportnities for new program
deployment. Some examples include 1) the Distribution Effciency Initiative, which is a study managed
by NEEA to determine efficient ways to design and operate distribution feeders through voltage
regulators, 2) a regional study to evaluate the energy-savings potential of ductless heat pumps,
and 3) efforts to measure the impacts oflight-emitting diode (LED) lighting. Other regional analyses in
which Idaho Power actively participated include the Commercial Building Stock Assessment and market
progress evaluations.
Annual Structure
The structure of the remaining portion of this report is based on customer sectors (categorized by
residential, commercial/industrial, and irrigation). The description of each sector is followed by
information about each program in that sector. Each program section includes a general program
description, annual activities, and future plans. A chart at the beginning of each program section
contains 2008 and 2007 program metrics in tabular format. Following the sector and program sections of
the report are descriptions of Idaho Power's activities in Market Transformation, Other Programs and
Activities, and Idaho Power's Regulatory Initiatives. The appendices follow the written sections and
contain tabular information on the 2008 expenses and savings, as well as historic information for all
energy effciency and demand response activities at Idaho Power.
Page 12 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Residential Sector
DENTIAL SECTOR
With over 404,000 service points serving a population of approximately one milion people, residential
customers represent Idaho Power's largest customer segment. Growth within this segment slowed
considerably in 2008, largely in response to regional and national economic conditions. During 2008,
Idaho Power added about 4,000 customers, equaling a growth rate of 1 %. Idaho Power experienced the
smallest residential customer growth rate since 1989. The residential segment represents 36% of Idaho
Power's total electricity usage.
Table 4.2008 Residential Program Summary
Total Costs Savings
Summer
Annual Peak
Participants Utilty Resource Energy Demand
Program (Number)(Units)(Dollars)(Dollars)(kWh)(MW)
Demand Response
A/C Cool Credit...........................20,195 homes $2,969,377 $2,616,072 n/a 23
Total $2,969,317 $2,616,072 n/a 23
Energy Effciency
Attic Insulation Pilot ... ..................282 homes $123,454 $157,866 317,814
Energy Efficient Lighting.. ... .........436,264 CFL bulbs $1,018,292 $793,265 14,309,444
Energy House Calls ....................1,099 homes $484,379 $484,379 883,038
ENERGY STAR'" Homes 254 homes $302,061 $375,007 468,958Northwest....................................
Heating & Cooling Efficiency 359 homes $473,551 $599,771 561,441Program ......................................
Home Products Program.............3,034 appliances/fixtures $250,860 $468,056 541,615
Home Weatherization Pilot ..........16 homes $52,807 $48,162 71,680
Oregon Residential 3 homes $7,417 $28,752 22,196Weatherization........................... .
Rebate Advantage.......................107 homes $90,888 $179,868 463,401
Weatherization Assistance for 439 homes/non-profis $1,375,632 $1,755,749 4,064,301Qualified Customers-Idaho........
Weatherization Assistance for 13 homes/non-profits $43,843 $74,048 73,841Qualified Customers-Dregon.....
Total $4,223,185 $4,964,924 21,717,729 24
Note: See Appendix 3 for notes on methodology and column definitions.
Programs available to residential customers include one demand response program, nine energy
efficiency programs, and the energy educational program. The demand response program offering is
the AlC Cool Credit program, with approximately 24,000 customers enrolled. Durng 2008,
this program expanded into Idaho Power's Payette and Twin Falls service areas. The residential
efficiency programs include Energy House Calls, Rebate Advantage, ENERGY STAR\I Homes
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 13
Residential Sector Idaho Power Company
Northwest, Oregon Residential Weatherization, Energy Efficient Lighting, WAQC, and Heating &
Cooling Efficiency Program. The new ENERGY STAR Home Products Program was operational in
2008, with strong residential customer participation.
Additionally, two new pilots were implemented in 2008. One was the Attic Insulation Pilot and the other
was the Home Weatherization Pilot. Analysis was conducted about the viability of the attic retrofit pilot
program. Plans are underway for implementation in June 2009 under the name Home Improvement
Program. The Home Weatherization Pilot will launch as a program in the Twin Falls area in 2009 under
the name Weatherization Solutions for Eligible Customers.
Idaho Power continued significantly increasing its outreach activities by participating in numerous retail
and community events during 2008. These parterships and outreach activities created specific
opportnities for the company to share the importance of energy efficiency and give customers
information and options about participating.
Many of these events were parterships with community retailers, including Home Depot, Lowe's,
Albertson's, Wal-Mart, and small, locally owned retailers. Idaho Power also paricipated in home and
garden shows, Parade of Homes, library education series, and other community events across Idaho
Power's service area. A sample of the new community events Idaho Power participated in during
the course of 2008 include the Susan G. Komen Race for a Cure, the St. Luke's Women's Challenge,
and the Idaho Green Expo, where Idaho Power released the new booklet 30 Simple Things You Can Do
To Save Energy. These events drew large crowds, providing Idaho Power an opportity to share energy
efficiency information.
Presentations to community groups and businesses were another emphasis during the year. Idaho Power
customer representatives made approximately 100 presentations to civic and community groups,
including chambers of commerce, school boards, service organizations, and businesses. Idaho Power
also developed a new energy effciency presentation, targeting fourth-grade through sixth-grade
students.
Page 14 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Residential Sector-A/C Cool Credit
Participation and Savings
Participants (homes )(a)
Energy Savings (kWh)
Demand Reduction (Mw)(a)
Program Costs by Funding Source
Idaho Energy Efficiency Rider
Oregon Energy Efficiency Rider
Idaho Power Funds
Total Program Costs-All Sources
Program Levelized Costs
Utility Levelized Cost ($/kWh)
Total Resource Levelized Cost ($/kWh)
Program Life Benefit/Cost Ratios
Utilty BenefiUCost Ratio
Total Resource BenefiUCost Ratio
Program Characteristics
Program Jurisdiction Idaho/Oregon
Program Inception 2003
(a) Program participation and demand reduction reflect enrollment as of July 15th. Year end enrollment in the program
was 23,505 homes.
Ale
2007
13,692
n/a
11
$2,421,461
$0
$4,692
$2,426,154
n/a
n/a
1.38
1.38
A/C Cool Credit is a voluntary dispatchable demand response program for residential customers.
Using communication hardware and software, Idaho Power cycles participants' central air conditioners
on and off via a direct load-control device installed on the air conditioning unit. Participants receive
a monthly, monetary incentive for participating in the program during the summer season. This program
enables Idaho Power to reduce system peaking requirements durng times when summer peak load is
high.
Individual radio-controlled or power line carrer (PLC) switches are installed on customers' air
conditioning units. These switches allow Idaho Power to cycle customers' air conditioners during
a cycling event. Under this program, Idaho Power may cycle participants' air conditioners for up to
40 hours each month in the months of June, July, and August.
In 2008, the program expanded beyond Ada County, Canyon County, and the Emmett valley to
the Payette and Twin Falls area. Mountain Home Air Force Base (MHAFB) housing residents also
joined the program in 2008. Cycling event hours changed from four-hour cycles to three-hour cycles,
pinpointing the peak time with less potential impact on participants. There were 15 cycling events in
2008, one in June, seven in July, and seven in August. The 2008 target was 16,000 new participants.
There were approximately 13,222 new participants in 2008.
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 15
Residential Sector-AIC Cool Credit Idaho Power Company
Marketing approaches during 2008 covered a range of methods. A/C Cool Credit pooled resources with
the City of Boise Recycling department and with United Water on a joint bil-stuffer campaign.
Idaho Power specialists visited large businesses, providing program information to the businesses'
employees. Idaho Power in-house AlC Cool Credit promotions attracted further program signups.
A cause-related marketing approach involved partering with both The Idaho Foodbank and Southeast
Oregon Regional Food Bank. Durng a "limited time offer," a $20 donation went to the food bank in
the participant's location for enrollng in the AlC Cool Credit program. As of December 2008,
this approach yielded 489 new signups and a total of$9,780 to the two food banks.
During 2008, a call center customer service representative (CSR) pilot was conducted. The CSRs
received training in signing up new AlC Cool Credit participants at the point of contact when an Idaho
Power customer initiates or transfers his/her account by phone. The project was successfuL.
Durng the first five months after the training was completed, five trained CSRs signed up 140 new
participants.
An outreach project included an Idaho Power specialist and a heating, ventilating, and air conditioning
(HV AC) journeyman providing AlC Cool Credit switch training for field technicians of HVAC
companies. Technicians learned about the direct load-control device installed on participating Idaho
Power customers' air conditioning units. Increasing the HVAC technician's knowledge of switch boxes
contributes to positive customer relations between the customer and the technician servicing the AlC
Cool Credit program participant's air conditioning unit.
The AlC Cool Credit program conducted a customer satisfaction survey between September and
October 2008. Of the 3,958 surveys sent out, 1,671 completed responses were returned, resulting in
a 42% response rate. A portion of the participants received the surey bye-mail, while the others
received the survey through postal maiL. Results showed a high level of satisfaction with the program,
with high ratings in program application process, comfort, frequency of cycling, overall satisfaction with
the program, and amount of information received. Most respondents indicated they chose to participate
in the program "to help reduce electrcal usage on hot summer days," to "receive the bill credit," or both.
An overwhelming majority of respondents indicated they would recommend the program to frends
or family.
The A/C Cool Credit program is expanding into the Pocatello area this spring, with marketing starting in
February. The program wil expand to areas where the paging signal does not reach, as meters are
installed in those areas as part of the Advanced Metering Infrastrctue (AMI) project. The 2009
AlC Cool Credit target is to add 12,000 new participants. An evaluation of the results of this demand
response program wil be implemented in Pocatello, Twin Falls, and MHAFB. Data loggers will be
installed on a random sample of paricipating customer's air conditioning units to collect data on run
time. Once the information is collected, analysis wil commence in autumn 2009 to estimate demand
reduction.
Page 16 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Residential Sector-AIC Cool Credit
Idaho Power plans to distribute AlC Cool Credit program information by using the technicians installng
the new AMI meters in the upcoming year. The technicians wil leave a door hanger with AlC Cool
Credit program information on the customers' doorknob after completing their installation work.
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 17
Residential Sector-Attic Insulation Pilot Idaho Power Company
Pi
Participation and Savings
Participants (homes)
Energy Savings (kWh)
Demand Reduction (MW)
Program Costs by Funding Source
Idaho Energy Effciency Rider
Oregon Energy Efficiency Rider
Idaho Power Funds
Total Program Costs-All Sources
Program Levelized Costs
Utility Levelized Cost ($fkWh)
Total Resource Levelized Cost ($fkWh)
Program Life Benefit/Cost Ratios
Utility Cost BenefiUCost Ratio
Total Resource BenefiUCost Ratio
Program Characteristics
Program Jurisdiction
Program Inception
2.48
1.94
Idaho
2008
2007
nfa
nfa
nfa
nfa
nfa
nfa
nfa
nfa
nfa
The Attic Insulation Pilot, conducted in Idaho during 2008, consisted of paying an incentive to
residential customers in the Idaho Power service area for installing additional attic insulation.
This program specifically targets the reduction of summer peak demand.
The pilot was conducted in Boise, Twin Falls, and Pocatello. Installations began May 2008 and were
completed by the first week of July. The attic insulation program paid a $0.15 per square foot incentive
for professionally installed attic insulation. Analysis of the information obtained from the attic insulation
pilot indicates that this is an opportnity for Idaho Power to provide a cost-effective program beginning
in 2009.
The Attic Insulation Pilot wil become a program in Idaho and Oregon in June 2009 under the name
Home Improvement Program. Plans include creating program information brochures to market
the program and incentive application forms for customers. In July, a bil stuffer explaining the new
program wil be included in all residential customers' bils. Marketing will include a direct mail
campaign after the program launch, followed by a print campaign later in 2009.
Page 18 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Residential Sector-Energy Efficient Lighting
ng
Participation and Savings
Participants (CFL bulbs)
Energy Savings (kWh)
Demand Reduction (MW)
Program Costs by Funding Source
Idaho Energy Efficiency Rider
Oregon Energy Efficiency Rider
Idaho Power Funds
Total Program Costs-All Sources
Program Levelized Costs
Utilty Levelized Cost ($/kWh)
Total Resource Levelized Cost ($/kWh)
Program Life Benefit/Cost Ratios
Utility BenefiUCost Ratio
Total Resource BenefiUCost Ratio
Program Characteristics
Program Jurisdiction
Program Inception
Idaho/Oregon
2002
2007
219,739
7,207,439
n/a
$519,818
$11,787
$10,445
$557,646
$0.012
$0.015
4.56
4.31
The Energy Efficient Lighting program, called the ENERGY STAR\I Lighting program in 2007,
strves for residential energy savings through the replacement of less effcient lighting with more
efficient technology. The average existing home has 38 light bulbs. New homes have an average of
77 light bulbs. Changing these bulbs to more efficient bulbs represents a low-cost, easy way for all
customers to achieve energy savings.
ENERGY STAR qualified compact fluorescent lights (CFLs) are an effcient alternative to standard
incandescent light bulbs and save money and energy. Bulbs come in a variety of wattages, colors,
and applications, including bulbs for three-way and dimmable fixtues. ENERGY STAR qualified bulbs
use 75% less energy and last up to 10 times longer than incandescent bulbs.
In 2008, the majority of energy savings were achieved through Idaho Power's participation in
two regional Change a Light promotions sponsored by the BP A and one sponsored by Idaho Power.
The 2007 BPA Change a Light promotion (spiral bulbs) carred over until February 2008. The BPA
promotion focusing on specialty bulbs extended through December 2008. Additionally, Idaho Power
initiated its own spiral-bulb promotion during autumn 2008. This spiral promotion ran independent of
the BP A promotion, focusing on smaller retailers and covering a greater Idaho Power service area than
the BP A program.
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 19
Residential Sector-Energy Efficient Lighting Idaho Power Company
Table 5 describes the energy savings and the number of CFL bulbs contributed by each segment of
the program.
Table 5.Energy Efficient Lighting Energy Savings
Estimated
Bulbs kWh
Promotion Description Contractor Timeframe Sold Savings
2007 Change a Light Spiral........99Ø spiral single BPA/Fluid 2007 carryover 60,987 2,000,357
pack spiral bulbs
2007 Change a Light Specialty..Specialty bulbs in BPA/PECI 2007 carryover 31,880 1,045,664
"big-box" stores
2008 Change a Light Spiral........99Ø single pack BPA/Fluid Spring 2008 41,660 1,366,448
spiral bulbs
2008 Change a Light Specialty..Specialty bulbs in BPA/PECI 2008 228,169 7,483,943
"big-box" stores
Change a Light Spiral.................99Ø single pack Fluid Fall 2008 71,935 2,359,470
spiral bulbs
Direct Install...............................Bulbs given directly nfa 2008 1,633 53,562
to customers
Total 436,234 14,309,44
Marketing during 2008 focused on education and outreach by educating customers about the benefits of
CFLs and selecting the appropriate bulb for a specific application. Idaho Power also marketed
the program through point-of-purchase materials and signs, in-store events and energy efficiency events,
the Idaho Power Customer Connection monthly newsletter, and the Idaho Power Web site.
In 2008, Idaho Power conducted 13 special events at national retail stores in Ontario, Nampa, Boise,
Twin Falls, Pocatello, and Chubbuck. Special events served as opportities for Idaho Power staff to
talk directly with customers at the point-of-purchase, answer questions, and promote all Idaho Power
energy efficiency programs as well as energy efficient lighting. Idaho Power held staff training events
on energy efficient lighting and proper disposal of mercur-containing light bulbs.
Idaho Power will continue advocating the Energy Efficient Lighting program in 2009 through
participation in regional lighting promotions. To ensure geographic coverage and bulb types that are not
included in BPA promotions, Idaho Power wil also continue its independent promotion. Additionally,
Idaho Power wil research purchasing habits and market segments of program participants using
coupon-based marketing promotions. The information wil be used to enhance program marketing and
increase program participation.
Page 20 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Residential Sector-Energy House Calls
Participation and Savings
Participants (homes)
Energy Savings (kWh)
Demand Reduction (MW)
Program Costs by Funding Source
Idaho Energy Efficiency Rider
Oregon Energy Efficiency Rider
Idaho Power Funds
Total Program Costs-All Sources
Program Levelized Costs
Utility Levelized Cost ($/kWh)
Total Resource Levelized Cost ($/kWh)
Program Life Benefit/Cost Ratios
Utility Benefit/Cost Ratio
Total Resource Benefit/Cost Ratio
Program Characteristics
Program Jurisdiction
Program Inception
2.20
2.20
Idaho/Oregon
2002
2007
700
699,899
n/a
$251,743
$3,349
$450
$336,372
$0.039
$0.039
The Energy House Calls program helps manufactured and mobile home owners with electrc heat save
on their energy bils by improving the home's efficiency. This energy efficiency program provides free
duct sealing and additional effciency measures to Idaho Power customers living in Idaho or Oregon in
a manufactured or mobile home using an electric furnace or heat pump.
Leaking duct systems can lose as much as 70% of the air intended for heating or cooling in a home.
Ducts operate under pressure, making a one-square-inch hole in a system similar to a 20-square-inch
hole in a wall. Previous studies show tyical losses from ducts are about 30%.
Services and products offered through the Energy House Calls program include duct testing and sealing
according to Performance Tested Comfort System (PTCS) specifications, installation of five CFL bulbs,
provision of two furnace filters along with replacement instrctions, water heater temperature test for
proper setting, and distribution of energy efficiency educational materials for manufactured home
occupants. The value of the service to the customer is dependent on the complexity of the repair.
The typical range of the average Idaho Power cost ofa service call is from $300 to $350. Idaho Power
provides the customer with the contractor contact information. Customers access the service by directly
callng one of the recognized, certified contractors specially trained to provide these services in their
region.
Program management is under contract with Ecos Consulting, a company with experience managing and
supplying duct-sealing service programs. Ecos Consulting coordinates the contractors performing local
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 21
Residential Sector-Energy House Calls Idaho Power Company
weatherization and energy efficiency services. To monitor quality assurance, third-party audits are
conducted in 5% of the homes served.
Idaho Power renegotiated the contract with Ecos Consulting for continuation of administrative
management of the Energy House Calls program. Idaho Power continued its direct mail campaign.
Recipients were targeted using a database of electrcally heated manufactured homes in the Idaho Power
service area in Idaho and Oregon.
After reviewing the locations of program activity and market saturation, it was determined that
marketing efforts should focus primarily in the Treasure Valley area. In 2008, an updated
cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted representing the focused regional marketing efforts, and was
determined to be cost-effective through 2009.
During 2008, Energy House Calls serviced 1,099 manufactured homes, resulting in approximately
883,038 kWh savings. The program conducted quality assurance on 5% of the homes serviced in
the Energy House Calls program. Idaho Power's third-party contractors inspected 57 homes,
with 43 homes passing and 13 homes failing the inspection. Contractors are required to revisit failed
homes and correct identified problems. The majority of failed homes occured during a specific period
and was the result of one contractor's activity. Once Ecos Consulting, who manages the
three contractors, was aware of the issue, the contractor sent a quality-assurance person out with
the technician for a few weeks of observation and released one employee from their duties.
The inspection failures were from jobs completed in early 2008, while subsequent quality inspections
were positive. All contractors sufficiently addressed and corrected issues that were identified.
Customer
Idaho Power conducted a customer satisfaction surey evaluating past experience with the service.
A total of243 Energy House Calls program participants completed the survey. The majority ofthese
customers indicated both an improved comfort level in their home as a result of participating in the
program and a high level of satisfaction with the program. Over 90% of the respondents indicated they
would recommend the program to friends or family. Additionally, all 57 Energy House Calls customers
who participated in the quality assurance check on 5% of the homes serviced reported having a positive
experience with the Energy House Calls program.
Strategies
Plans for the upcoming year include continuing the direct mail campaign to all areas to improve limited
participation in some areas. Because of turnover in manufactured homes, some of the customers are not
being reached. Idaho Power plans to update its database to enable targeting new customers who were not
contacted previously. To determine other possible avenues of recruitment and adjustments to direct mail
campaign, Idaho Power is conducting a surey of non-participants, defined as those who have received
direct mail letters but have elected to not participate.
Page 22 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Residential Sector-ENERGY STAR Homes Northwest
Northwest
Participation and Savings
Participants (homes)
Energy Savings (kWh)
Demand Reduction (MW)
Program Costs by Funding Source
Idaho Energy Efficiency Rider
Oregon Energy Efficiency Rider
Idaho Power Funds
Total Program Costs-All Sources
Program Levelized Costs
Utilty Levelized Cost ($/kWh)
Total Resource Levelized Cost ($/kWh)
Program Life Benefit/Cost Ratios
Utilty Benefit/cost Ratio
Total Resource Benefit/Cost Ratio
Program Characteristics
Program Jurisdiction
Program Inception
1.76
1.43
Idaho/Oregon
2003
2007
303
629,634
1
$451,775
$12,249
$11,020
$475,044
$0.056
$0.067
ENERGY STAR Homes Northwest is a regionally coordinated initiative supported by a partnership of
Idaho Power, NEEA, and the State ofIdaho Offce of Energy Resources (OER) to improve energy
efficient constrction practices for new, single-family homes. Although this program results in summer
peak reduction, the program specifically targets the reduction in energy usage accomplished by
increasing the effciency of residential building envelope and air delivery system.
The ENERGY STAR Homes Northwest residential construction program builds homes that are at least
20% more energy efficient than those built to standard Idaho code. The program specifications for
ENERGY STAR Homes are verified by independent third-party home performance specialists and are
certified by the Idaho OER and the United States Environmental Protection Agency. The homes are
more effcient, comfortable, and durable than standard homes constructed according to local
building codes.
Homes that earn the ENERGY STAR label include six "must-have" specifications. The specifications
found in all ENERGY STAR qualified homes are 1) effective insulation, 2) high-performance windows,
3) tight construction and sealed ductwork, 4) energy efficient lighting, 5) ENERGY STAR qualified
appliances, and 6) effcient heating and cooling equipment.
Builders involved in ENERGY STAR Homes Northwest receive up to a $400 incentive per home built
to the Northwest Builder Option Package standards in Idaho Power's service area. Builders who enter
their homes in a Parade of Homes receive a $1,000 incentive.
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 23
Residential Sector-ENERGY STAR Homes Northwest Idaho Power Company
The Idaho Power program collaborates with many local entities for program management, such as
ENERGY STAR Homes Northwest and builders. A large part of the program's role in 2008 was
conducting education and training activities for residential, new construction industr partners.
The 2006 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC), which the State of Idaho adopted as its
standard building code, took effect January 1,2008. This new code meets ENERGY STAR Homes
Northwest program standards in several key areas, which decreases the energy savings of each
ENERGY STAR Home. As a direct result of the change in Idaho code and the resulting reduction of
energy savings, Idaho Power reduced the participating builder incentive to $400 per qualifying home in
2008, down from the $750 incentive previously offered. Incentives for Parade of Homes entries remain
unchanged.
Although new housing starts were down throughout the Idaho Power service area, the ENERGY STAR
Homes Northwest program achieved a market share of 6.2% of new housing starts through 2008. This is
up from 2007 market share of 5%.
Idaho Power conducted numerous ENERGY STAR promotional activities during 2008. Idaho Power
sponsored the energy efficiency awards for the Building Contractor's Association of Southwest Idaho
(BCASWI) and the Snake River Valley Building Contractor's Association (SRVBCA) Parade of
Homes. Idaho Power presented energy efficiency awards at both the BCASWI Parade of Homes awards
banquet and the SRVBCA Parade of Home awards banquet. Idaho Power maintained a presence in the
building industr by participating in and supporting the SRVBCA Builder's Expo, the Magic Valley
Builder's Association Builders Expo, the Idaho Building Efficiency Conference, the Home Depot
Contractor's show, and the Idaho Building Contractors Association Convention.
Media campaigns heightened awareness of the ENERGY STAR Homes program. Using radio and
billboard advertising, Idaho Power conducted a cooperative media campaign in conjunction with
ENERGY STAR Homes Northwest and the Environmental Protection Agency. Idaho Power also
co~sponsored, and participated in, activities such as the Cedar Crossing 100% ENERGY STAR
community kick-off event in Caldwell. Cedar Crossing is Caldwell's first 100% ENERGY STAR
community.
Training is a major function ofIdaho Power's ENERGY STAR Homes program. To that end, numerous
realtor trainings were conducted in Caldwell, Nampa, and Boise. A builder training was held in
Pocatello.
Other marketing projects involved adding a message about this program to residential customers'
electrc bill. These bill messages encouraged Idaho Power customers to visit ENERGY STAR qualified
homes in their local Parade of Homes events. An ENERGY STAR Homes program bil stuffer sent
information to all residential customers in the Idaho Power service area. Additionally, Idaho Power
continued to support the activities of the Idaho ENERGY STAR Builder's Partership (IESBP) 100%
Builders group. Idaho Power was instrmental in the formation of this group in 2007. Curently Idaho
Power assists the group with marketing activities by funding and offering marketing services.
Page 24 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Residential Sector-ENERGY STAR Homes Northwest
A key promotional strategy is participation in industry conferences and home shows. During 2009,
Idaho Power wil continue providing realtor trainings; supporting Parade of Homes events, the Building
Contractors Association (BCA), and realtor associations; improving marketing material distributions;
and supporting the IESBP group and its activities.
Marketing plans include using print advertising to assist existing builders with moving unsold ENERGY
STAR qualified homes inventory. The Idaho Power program staff wil explore new and innovative ways
to educate consumers, realtors, and appraisers about the benefits and features of ENERGY STAR
Homes.
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 25
Residential Sector-Heating & Cooling Efficiency Program Idaho Power Company
&
Participation and Savings
Participants (homes)
Energy Savings (kWh)
Demand Reduction (MW)
Program Costs by Funding Source
Idaho Energy Effciency Rider
Oregon Energy Efficiency Rider
Idaho Power Funds
Total Program Costs-All Sources
Program Levelized Costs
Utility Levelized Cost ($/kWh)
Total Resource Levelized Cost ($/kWh)
Program Life Benefit/Cost Ratios
Utilty Benefit/Cost Ratio
Total Resource Benefit/Cost Ratio
Program Characteristics
Program Jurisdiction
Program Inception
0.53
0.28
Idaho/Oregon
2007
2007
4
1,595
n/a
$482,051
$3,289
$2,871
$488,211
n/a
n/a
The residential Heating & Cooling Efficiency (H&CE) Program provides incentives for the purchase
and proper installation of qualified high-effciency heating and cooling equipment and services to Idaho
Power residential customers. This program has been available to Idaho customers since September 2007
and to Oregon customers since August 2008.
Objectives ofthe H&CE program are acquiring kWh savings through the implementation of
energy-saving HV AC measures in the existing and new residential sector. Cash incentives are provided
to residential customers and HVAC contractors who install eligible central air conditioners (CAC),
heat pumps, and evaporative coolers. Incentives are also awarded for qualifying heat pump tune-ups and
CAC tue-ups meeting Idaho Power's program specifications. A participating HVAC company must
perform all services, except for installation on evaporative coolers. Evaporative coolers are self-installed
pieces of equipment. There is no need for a contractor to be involved and no specific installation
requirements as there are for CACs and heat pumps.
In keeping with quality installation principles, the H&CE Program requires contractors to become
"participating" companies. To do this, contractors in the program must sign an agreement with Idaho
Power. The participating companies must ensure their service technicians and installers attend required
training on the pro¡er installation of air conditioners and heat pumps. These companies must purchase
and use TrueFlow Meters to measure air flow and adhere to program specifications.
Page 26 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Residential Sector-Heating & Cooling Efficiency Program
New in 2008 was the addition of the open-loop water source heat pump measure. Idaho Power expanded
the program into Oregon upon approval, in August 2008, of Schedule 72 by the OPUc. In 2008,
the H&CE Program processed 359 incentive applications and paid $72,900 in incentives, resulting in
a total energy savings of 561 ,440 kWh. During 2008, Idaho Power conducted 22 contractor training
sessions on the proper sizing and installation of heat pumps and air conditioners, simplified duct design,
and program refresher classes, reaching 201 attendees.
Marketing tactics began in March, using bil inserts, radio ads, newspaper articles, home and garden
shows, and exhibitor booths at various community events.
Idaho Power conducted a customer satisfaction survey during 2008. The majority of respondents heard
about the H&CE Program from their heating and cooling contractor. Almost 75% of respondents
indicated their heating and cooling contractor was "very knowledgeable" about the program. Eight out
often respondents said they "definitely would recommend" the contractor they used to a friend or
relative. Almost 80% of the respondents said participation in the program was "very easy." The majority
of respondents pursued additional program information from the H&CE Program equipment page on
Idaho Power's Web site. Ofthose who did go to the Web site, most said it was "easy to use" and
the information they gained from the Web site was "usefuL." Most ofthe respondents said they were
"very satisfied" with the program and would recommend it to a friend or family member. When asked
what it was they liked best about the program, most responded that it was the incentive or the
energy savings that they liked best.
During 2008, an H&CE Program contractor surey was conducted. Eighteen contractors responded to
the survey. Responses reflected contractors from all regions ofIdaho Power's operations. The majority
of the respondents said they heard about the program through a "notification letter from Idaho Power"
At the time of the survey, in September, most contractors had submitted somewhere between one and
five incentive applications, but there were three contractors who had submitted more than
20 applications. Two contractors indicated they had not submitted any incentive applications, and one of
those said it was because he/she was too busy. Most of the contractors indicated they have a good
understanding of the technical requirements of the programs and had opportnities for training in the
program. The majority of the respondents indicated they had promoted the H&CE Program by
encouraging customers to participate. Satisfaction with the program was varied with one-third of the
contractor respondents being satisfied, one-third being neutral, and one-third being dissatisfied. Results
for wilingness to recommend the program were similar to satisfaction ratings. Most of the contractors'
dissatisfaction with the program was centered around the paperwork and program design. In response,
Idaho Power modified the paperwork to reduce the duplication of information, and also consolidated
forms. Several of the contractors requested removing airflow and sizing requirements. Idaho Power
considers the quality installation requirements of this program essential to maintaining the program's
integrity. In 2009, Idaho Power wil continue to require quality installation of qualifying heats pumps
and increase the contractor incentives.
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 27
Residential Sector-Heating & Cooling Efficiency Program Idaho Power Company
The first-year cost-effectiveness review identified measures that were not cost-effective. Plans for
the upcoming year include removing air conditioner and tue-up incentives, effective second quarter
2009. The program enhanced its criteria for contractors to remain on the participating Idaho Power list.
Contractor training and marketing the program through bil stuffers and community events wil continue
throughout 2009. Idaho Power is investigating cross-promoting the evaporative coolers with the Home
Products Program and determining the feasibility of adding duct sealing as a measure.
Idaho Power joined the Northwest Ductless Heat Pump Project and wil implement the Idaho Power
pilot in its service area beginning March 2009. The goals of this pilot are to promote the ductless heat
pump technology as an energy-saving alternative for customers with electrcally heated homes, to
determine how much electricity this technology saves in order to validate a deemed-savings number, and
to obtain customer satisfaction and behavior patterns regarding the technology. Idaho Power will offer
customers incentives for paricipating in the pilot. Pilot results will be available in 2011.
Page 28 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Residential Sector-Home Products Program
Participation and Savings
Participants (appliances)
Energy Savings (kWh)
Demand Reduction (MW)
Program Costs by Funding Source
Idaho Energy Efficiency Rider
Oregon Energy Efficiency Rider
Idaho Power Funds
Total Program Costs-All Sources
Program Levelized Costs
Utility Levelized Cost ($/kWh)
Total Resource Levelized Cost ($/kWh)
Program Life Benefit/Cost Ratios
Utility Benefit/Cost Ratio
Total Resource Benefit/Cost Ratio
Program Characteristics
Program Jurisdiction
Program Inception
1.42
0.77
Idaho/Oregon
2008
2007
n/a
n/a
n/a
$8,746
$460
$69
$9,275
n/a
n/a
The Home Products Program, formerly the ENERGY STAR\I Appliance Program, provides an incentive
payment to Idaho Power residential customers for purchasing ENERGY STAR qualified appliances,
lighting, or other products. ENERGY STAR is a governent-backed program designating products as
energy efficient. Appliances and products with ENERGY STAR must meet higher, stricter effciency
criteria than federal standards. Washers must have a Modified Energy Factor of 1.72 or greater and
a Water Factor of8.0 or lower, the minimum qualifications for an ENERGY STAR qualified clothes
washer. To qualify, the washer must have been purchased after April 1,2008 for customers in Idaho and
after May 21, 2008 for customers in Oregon.
The ENERGY STAR Appliance Program rolled out on April 1, 2008 for Idaho Power Idaho customers
and on May 21, 2008 for Idaho Power Oregon customers. With the addition of ENERGY STAR
qualified refrigerators, ceiling fans with light kits, light kits, and light fixtures, the ENERGY STAR
Appliance Program was renamed and launched on August 1, 2008.
Initially, the clothes washer incentive was the only product offered under the original program.
Curent offerings and related incentives include clothes washers ($50), refrgerators ($30), light fixtures
(up to $15 per fixture), ceiling fans with light kits, or ceiling fan light kit attachments (up to $20 per
fixtue). Only products purchased after August 1, 2008 are eligible. Program participation is a simple
process for customers. The customer completes the brief incentive application, submits it with a copy of
the sales receipt, and then receives an incentive check in the mail if the purchase qualifies.
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 29
Residential Sector-Home Products Program Idaho Power Company
Marketing of the Home Product Program to customers occurs primarily through retail outlets.
Idaho Power provides information to store managers and employees through training sessions at store
staff meetings and through periodic visits by Idaho Power representatives. Collateral materials, such as
program brochures with application tear~off forms, were developed and distributed to nearly 100 retail
stores. In addition, program modifications are delivered via letters sent directly to store managers.
Retail salespeople also assisted in promoting the program to their customers. Information gathered from
a series of marketing questions on the incentive application form indicated salespeople are a proven,
effective avenue for marketing the program. One question pertains to how the customer learned about
the program. The most common answer was the salesperson.
Idaho Power promotes the program directly to residential customers via bil stuffers, community
promotions, Idaho Power field staff, and other outreach activities. Durng summer 2008, bil stuffers
detailing the program were mailed to all Idaho Power residential customers.
The Home Products Program exceeded the goals for 2008. Idaho Power paid the first Home Products
Program incentive in May 2008, and paid 3,034 incentives during 2008, resulting in 541,615 kWh of
savings. Incentives were issued for 2,451 clothes washers, 480 refrigerators, 98 light fixtures,
three ceiling fans, and two light kits.
2009
Based on the current success, the marketing strategy for 2009 wil remain similar with only minimal
adjustments and updates as needed. The current strategy enhances Idaho Power's ability to meet
the 2009 program goals. The Home Products Program will cross-promote with other Idaho Power
programs, evaluate success, and develop promotional ma.terials. Idaho Power will continue to evaluate
potential products for addition to the program during 2009 and beyond.
Page 30 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Residential Sector-Home Weatherization Pilot
H Pi
Participation and Savings
Participants (homes)
Energy Savings (kWh)
Demand Reduction (MW)
Program Costs by Funding Source
Idaho Energy Effciency Rider
Oregon Energy Efficiency Rider
Idaho Power Funds
Total Program Costs-All Sources
Program Levelized Costs
Utility Levelized Cost ($fkWh)
Total Resource Levelized Cost ($fkWh)
Program Life Benefit/Cost Ratios
Utility Benefit/Cost Ratio
Total Resource Benefit/Cost Ratio
Program Characteristics
Program Jurisdiction
Program Inception
1.31
1.43
IdahofOregon
2008
2007
nfa
nfa
nfa
nfa
nfa
nfa
nfa
nfa
nfa
Idaho Power introduced a new weatherization pilot in the Twin Falls area. This program is modeled
after the Weatherization Assistance for Qualified Customers (W AQC) program. The pilot targeted
customers who applied, but were deemed financially ineligible, for participation in Low Income Home
Energy Assistance Programs (LIHEAP), and who are not likely to participate in other programs.
The difference between the existing WAQC program and the pilot are the pilot's higher income
eligibility criteria of 151 % to 250% of the state poverty level, and federal government dollars are not
used in the pilot. In all other aspects, the pilot resembled W AQC.
Idaho Power contracted with Home Energy Management, LLC, with a goal of weatherizing 20 homes in
2008 at no cost for the customer. After the weatherization measures were installed, Idaho Power
completed the verification and analysis process, comparing the current Savings Investment Ratio (SIR)
with Idaho Power cost-effectiveness modeL.
2008
The pilot was launched during the last quarer of 2008 in the Twin Falls area. Home Energy
Management, LLC, weatherized 16 electrically heated homes of eligible Idaho Power customers. Energy
savings achieved was 71,680 kWh/year with an average home saving 4,480 kWh/year. Total costs were
$52,807 with an average job cost of $3,300.
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 31
Residential Sector-Home Weatherization Pilot Idaho Power Company
Based on the pilot results, Idaho Power plans to expand the pilot into a program offered in the Twin
Falls area in 2009. Home Energy Management, LLC, wil weatherize 45 homes in Idaho Power's
southern region service area under the newly named program, Weatherization Solutions for Eligible
Customers Program. Eligible customers will include Idaho Power customers that heat their homes
electrcally and earn an income between 161 % and 250% of the federal poverty leveL. Customers who
are either purchasing or renting their homes may be eligible.
Identification of potential participants is done through the Community Action Partership Association of
Idaho (CAPAI), who serves as administrator for LIHEAP for the Idaho Departent of Health and
Welfare. Customers deemed financially ineligible for federal LIHEAP assistance are sent denial letters
by CAPAI. For the 2009 program, eligible candidates with electrically heated homes are selected from
the list of denial letter recipients within the Twin Falls service area.
Idaho Power plans to save an average of 6,000 kWh per weatherized home per year, for a total energy
savings of 270,000 kWh annually. The Idaho Power program and field staff plans to complete
an evaluation of measures installed in weatherized homes in 2009 and the participants' knowledge
gained regarding energy efficiency.
Page 32 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Residential Sector-Oregon Residential Weatherization
Residential
Participation and Savings
Participants (homes)
Energy Savings (kWh)
Demand Reduction (MW)
Program Costs by Funding Source
Idaho Energy Efficiency Rider
Oregon Energy Efficiency Rider
Idaho Power Funds
Total Program Costs-All Sources
Program Levelized Costs
Utility Levelized Cost ($/kWh)
Total Resource Levelized Cost ($/kWh)
Program Life Benefit/Costs Ratios
Utility Benefit/Cost Ratio
Total Resource Benefit/Cost Ratio
Program Characteristics
Program Jurisdiction
Program Inception
n/a
n/a
Idaho/Oregon
1980
2007
1
9,971
n/a
$0
$0
$3,781
$3,781
$0.028
$0.042
Idaho Power offers free energy audits for electrically heated homes of customers within the Oregon
service area. This is a statutory program offered under Oregon Rate Schedule No. 78. Upon a customer's
request, an Idaho Power representative visits the home to analyze it for energy efficiency. An estimate of
costs and savings for specific measures is given to the customer. Idaho Power offers financial assistance
for a portion of the costs for weatherization measures, either as a cash incentive or with a 6.5% interest
loan.
During the month of July, Idaho Power sent every Oregon residential customer an informational
brochure about energy audits and home weatherization financing. A total of 37 Oregon customers
responded. Each of the 37 customers returned a card from the brochure indicating they were interested
in a home energy audit, weatherization loan, or incentive payment. Twenty-three audits and responses to
customer inquiries to the program were completed.
Idaho Power issued three rebates totaling $1,908.22 for 22,196 kWh savings. The rebates and related
savings were for ceiling insulation, window replacement, and a wall insulation project. There were no
loans made through this program during 2008. Five customer responses were directed to Cascade
Natual Gas.
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 33
Residential Sector-Oregon Residential Weatherization Idaho Power Company
Plans for the upcoming year include notifying customers in their May bil about the program.
Idaho Power wil complete requested audits and fulfill all cost-effective rebate and loan applications.
Page 34 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Residential Sector-Rebate Advantage
Rebate
Participation and Savings
Participants (homes)
Energy Savings (kWh)
Demand Reduction (MW)
Program Costs by Funding Source
Idaho Energy Effciency Rider
Oregon Energy Effciency Rider
Idaho Power Funds
Total Program Costs-All Sources
Program Levelized Costs Ratios
Utility Levelized Cost ($/kWh)
Total Resource Levelized Cost ($/kWh)
Program Life Benefit/Cost Ratios
Utility BenefiUCost Ratio
Total Resource BenefiUCost Ratio
Program Characteristics
Program Jurisdiction
Program Inception
7.19
2.80
Idaho/Oregon
2003
2007
123
554,018
n/a
$58,854
$4,609
$733
$89,269
$0.010
$0.021
Idaho Power customers who purchase a newall-electric, ENERGY STAR\I qualified manufactured
home and site it in Idaho Power's service area are eligible for a $500 rebate through the Rebate
Advantage program. Salespersons receive a $100 incentive for each qualified home that they sell.
In addition to offering financial incentives, the Rebate Advantage program promotes and educates
buyers and retailers of manufactured homes about the benefits of owning energy effcient models.
Quality control and energy efficiency specifications for qualified homes are established by
the Northwest Energy Efficient Manufactured Housing (NEEM) program. NEEM is a consortium of
manufacturers and state energy offices in the Northwest. In addition to specifications and quality,
NEEM tracks the production and on-site performance of ENERGY STAR qualified manufactured
homes.
The Rebate Advantage program helps Idaho Power customers with the initial costs associated with
purchasing a new energy efficient ENERGY STAR qualified manufactured home. This enables the
homebuyer to enjoy the long-term benefit of lower electric bils and greater comfort provided by these
homes. In addition, Idaho Power encourages sales consultants to discuss energy efficiency with their
customers during the sales process.
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 35
Residential Sector-Rebate Advantage Idaho Power Company
During 2008, Idaho Power paid 107 incentives on new manufactured homes. The customer target for
2008 on the number of homes purchased was 150 homes. The slow economy had a dramatic effect on all
types of housing and contributed to the lower number of incentives. New Rebate Advantage marketing
materials were developed during the year, including a program brochure and new display posters for
placement at dealership sales offices and in ENERGY STAR qualified model homes. Idaho Power
customer representatives (CR) visited each of the approximately 19 dealerships at least three times
during 2008, answering questions and distrbuting materials.
Idaho Power conducted two different surveys in 2008 for the Rebate Advantage program. The first
survey covered manufactured home dealers who participated in the Rebate Advantage program.
Seventeen dealer program participants completed the survey. Results indicated strong awareness and
understanding of the Rebate Advantage program. One hundred percent of the respondents indicated they
"always use" or "occasionally use" the program materials provided by Idaho Power. Almost 94% of
the respondents "strongly agreed" and "somewhat agreed" the materials were useful in promoting
ENERGY STAR qualified manufactured homes.
The second Rebate Advantage program survey conducted was with customers who purchased an
ENERGY STAR qualified manufactured home and received an incentive from Idaho Power.
Ninety-four program participants responded to this survey, with almost 87% using their new home as
a primary residence. Close to 68% ofthe respondents reported they were "very knowledgeable" or
"somewhat knowledgeable" about ENERGY STAR qualified homes before entering the dealership,
and almost 95% of the respondents were "very knowledgeable" or "somewhat knowledgeable" about
ENERGY STAR qualified homes after leaving the dealership.
Idaho Power plans to continue the Rebate Advantage program in 2009, explore new marketing methods,
and promote the program. CRs will enhance relationships with dealerships by visiting each dealership
quarterly, offering program support, answering questions, and distributing materials. The involvement of
local Idaho Power personnel interacting with the local dealers reemphasizes the importance of
promoting the benefits of ENERGY STAR qualified homes and products.
Page 36 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Residential Sector-WAQC
for
Participation and Savings
Participants (homes/non-profits)
Energy Savings (KWh)
Demand Reduction (MW)
Program Costs by Funding Source
Idaho Energy Efficiency Rider
Oregon Energy Efficiency Rider
Idaho Power Funds
Total Program Costs-All Sources
Program Levelized Costs
Utility Levelized Cost ($/kWh)
Total Resource Levelized Cost ($/kWh)
Program Life Benefit/Cost Ratios
Utility Benefit/Cost Ratio
Total Resource Benefit/Cost Ratio
Program Characteristics
Program Jurisdiction
Program Inception
Idaho/Oregon
1989
2007
408
3,338,126
n/a
$0
$0
$1,323,624
$1,323,624
$0.030
$0.040
2.17
1.50
The WAQC program provides fuding for the installation of cost-effective weatherization measures in
qualified owner-occupied and rental homes that are electrically heated. Enhancements enable qualified
families to maintain a comfortable home environment, while saving energy and money otherwise spent
on heating, cooling, and lighting. Participants receive energy efficiency education to help save energy in
their home.
WAQC is modeled after the United States Departent of Energy (DOE) Weatherization Program.
The DOE program is managed through Health and Human Services offices in Idaho and by the Oregon
Housing and Community Services in Oregon. Idaho Power, in conjunction with Community Action
Partnership (CAP) agencies in the Idaho Power service area, serves as the administrator ofWAQC.
Federal funds are allocated to the Idaho Deparment of Health and Welfare and Oregon Housing and
Community Services, then to CAP agencies based upon United States Census data of qualifying
household income within each CAP agency's geographic area. The CAP agencies oversee local
weatherization crews and contractors providing implementations that improve energy effciency of
the homes. W AQC allows these state agencies to leverage their federal weatherization dollars and serve
more residents by attaining nonfederal supplemental fuding and other resources to supplement federal
LIHEAP and weatherization funds.
During 2008, Idaho CAP agencies weatherized 434 electrcally heated homes in Idaho and 13 in
Oregon, totaling 452 weatherized homes. Anual energy savings were 4,064 MWh for Idaho and
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 37
Residential Sector-WAQC Idaho Power Company
74 MWh for Oregon. W AQC funded the weatherization of five buildings housing nonprofit
organizations that serve special needs populations in their Idaho communities. The annual energy
savings from the nonprofit weatherization was 130 MWh.
Surveys are sent to program participants after completion of the weatherization process in order to
measure satisfaction, education efforts, and behavior changes. Idaho Power mailed a W AQC participant
survey durng June and December 2008 to customers who received W AQC services in the previous
six months. Twenty-nine percent, or 104 of 360, of all customers sureyed responded to the surey
about W AQC. Of those customers who responded, nearly 87% said they learned "some" or "a lot" about
saving electrcity in their home. Additionally, 101 of those same customers, or over 97%, said that they
had tred "some" or "a lot" of ways to save energy in their homes.
Additionally, Idaho Power program specialists participated in the Idaho state peer review process,
which involved peer agency weatherization crews within the state reviewing homes weatherized by each
of the agencies. Results show all CAP agency weatherization departments are weatherizing in
accordance to federal guidelines.
Idaho Power is involved with the Policy Advisory Council, which serves as an oversight committee for
weatherization activities in Idaho. Through this forum, Idaho Power participates in the weatherization
policy for the State of Idaho.
The customer satisfaction weatherization survey used during 2008 wil be used again in 2009.
Additionally, in response to a request from regional CAP agencies, Idaho Power employees plan to
participate in National Weatherization Day on October 30.
Page 38 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Commercialllndustrial Sector
N ECTOR
The commercial and industral sector consists of over 64,000 customers. During 2008, new commercial
customers increased by 1,360, for an increase of about 2% over 2007. Individual customer energy usage
within this segment varies from a few kWh each month to several hundred thousand kWh each month.
The commercial segment of this sector represents approximately 27% of total electricity usage,
while the industral segment of this sector represents about 30% of Idaho Power's total electrcity usage.
Industral customers and special contract customers in this sector are Idaho Power's largest individual
energy consumers. This group consists of approximately 122 customers.
Prog
Table 6. 2008 Commercial/Industrial Program Summary
Total Costs Savings
Summer
Peak
Demand
Annual
Participants Utilty Resource Energy
Program (Number)(Units)(Dollars)(Dollars)(fWh)Energy Efficiency
Building Efficiency........................60 projects $1,055,009 $1,671,375 6,598,123
Easy Upgrades.............................685 projects $2,992,261 $10,096,627 25,928,391
Holiday Lighting Program .............14 businesses $28,782 $73,108 259,092
Oregon Commercial Audit............0 audits $58 $58
Custom Effciency.........................100 projects $4,045,671 $16,312,379 41,058,639
Total $8,121,179 $28,153,548 73,84,245
MW
1
4
5
10
Note: See Appendix 3 for notes on methodology and column definitions.
Three major programs targeting different energy efficiency market segments are offered to
commerciai/industrial customers in Idaho Power's Idaho and Oregon service areas. Easy Upgrades
offers a menu of typical commercial retrofit measures with prescriptive incentive amounts for lighting,
HV AC, motors, building shell, plug loads, and grocery refrgeration. The Building Efficiency program
for new construction projects achieves energy savings that are cost-effective at the time of constrction,
enabling Idaho Power customers to apply energy efficient design features and technologies that would
otherwise be lost opportnities for savings to their projects. This program encourages incorporation of
qualified energy-saving improvements for lighting, cooling, building shell, and energy control options.
Participants in the Building Effciency and Easy Upgrades programs can receive incentives for any
projects completed up to $100,000 per site per year. The Custom Effciency program offers financial
incentives for large commercial and industral energy users undertaking custom projects to improve
the effciency of their electrical systems or processes. Idaho Power continues to offer the Oregon
Commercial Audits program to medium and small commercial customers.
In 2009, Idaho Power plans to launch a commercial demand response program. Idaho Power has
contracted with a third-party aggregator to reduce peak demand at critical times. The aggregator
contracts directly with Idaho Power commercial and industral customers to achieve the demand
reduction.
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 39
Commercialllndustrial Sector Idaho Power Company
In 2008, Idaho Power contracted with the Integrated Design Lab (IDL) in Boise to accomplish specific
tasks to be completed in 2009. IDL wil create an Energy Use Index database from Idaho Power
customers and analyze the quality of commissioning services in the Treasure Valley. IDL will provide
educational sessions for the local design community and organize a building simulation users group to
help promote and enhance the local simulation skils. Other IDL tasks are to conduct a post-occupancy
survey to study customer satisfaction with technology incentives through the commercial energy
efficiency programs and to evaluate and report on the current market conditions for system sizing of
package rooftop HV AC units. Lastly, IDL wil identify and summarize key energy efficiency resources,
events, news items, and technologies useful to Idaho Power for evaluating current incentives and future
incentive opportnities for the commercial and industrial sector customers.
Page 40 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Commercial/lndustrial Sector-Building Efficiency
Participation and Savings
Participants (projects)
Energy Savings (kWh)
Demand Reduction (MW)
Program Costs by Funding Source
Idaho Energy Efficiency Rider
Oregon Energy Efficiency Rider
Idaho Power Funds
Total Program Costs-All Sources
Program Levelized Costs
Utility Levelized Cost ($/kWh)
Total Resource Levelized Cost ($/kWh)
Program Life Benefit/Cost Ratios
Utiity BenefiUCost Ratio
Total Resource BenefiUCost Ratio
Program Characteristics
Program Jurisdiction
Program Inception
Idaho/Oregon
2004
2007
22
2,817,248
-:1
$661,485
$5,766
$1,781
$669,032
$0.026
$0.032
2.14
1.55
The Building Effciency program enables customers in Idaho Power's service area in Idaho and Oregon
to apply energy effcient design features and technologies that would otherwise be lost opportities for
savings to their projects. The Building Effciency program offers a menu of measures and incentives for
lighting, cooling, building shell, and control-efficiency options. Program incentives also include funding
for custom projects, as well as additional incentives for commissioning that ensures the systems perform
as designed.
The Building Effciency program is offered to commercial and industral customers involved in
the constrction of new buildings or constrction projects with significant additions, remodels,
or expansions. The program offers incentives up to $100,000. Commercial and industral customers
taking service under, or who wil take service under, Schedule 7 (Small General Service), Schedule 9
(Large General Service), Schedule 19 (Large Power Service), or special contract customers are eligible
to participate.
Program marketing is targeted at architects, engineers, and other local design professionals.
Monthly e-mail program updates are sent to building developers, design professionals, contractors,
building owners, Idaho Power field personnel, and other interested parties.
Through the Building Effciency program, Idaho Power is a primary sponsor of the Boise Integrated
Design Lab (IDL), which provides technical assistance and training seminars to local architects and
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 41
Commercial/Industrial Sector-Building Efficiency Idaho Power Company
designers. Much of this activity is coordinated and supported through NEEA's BetterBricks\I program.
The Building Effciency program sponsors the annual BetterBricks awards held in October in Boise.
In 2008, Idaho Power made minor modifications to accommodate Idaho's adoption of the 2006 IECC,
effective January 1,2008. Eligibility requirements for three ofthe 14 measures changed in 2008.
The Building Effciency program completed 60 new construction, major renovations, and major
additions projects in 2008, resulting in 6,598,123 kWh in energy savings. Idaho Power paid $846,931 in
incentives for completed projects in 2008.
The IDL began a measurement and verification study on four of the 14 measures offered under
the Building Effciency program. Through the contract with IDL, additional measurement and
verification activities for the program are expected to continue through 2009. The results of the first
four measures evaluated will be available in 2009.
Two incentive measures used through 2008 have been altered for 2009. Idaho Power made minor
modifications to the menu of 14 measures, effective January 1,2009. One under-used measure, premium
windows, was replaced with a more popular option, exterior window shading. On another measure,
demand-control ventilation, the incentive level was adjusted down. The incentive payment is now based
on the outside airfow, not the unit-rated airflow, resulting in a lesser incentive amount.
Measurement and verification of selected measures offered through the Building Effciency program
will continue through the IDL. IDL wil install monitoring equipment on selected Building Efficiency
participant facilities and report the results in 2009. Idaho Power has designed a survey to measure
participant satisfaction in the Building Effciency program. The program plans to implement this survey
in 2009.
Page 42 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Commercial/Industrial Sector-Custom Efficiency
c
Participation and Savings
Participants (projects)
Energy Savings (kWh)
Demand Reduction (MW)
Program Costs by Funding Source
Idaho Energy Efficiency Rider
Oregon Energy Efficiency Rider
Idaho Power Funds
Total Program Costs-All Sources
Program Levelized Costs
Utility Levelized Cost ($/kWh)
Total Resource Levelized Cost ($/kWh)
Program Life Benefit/Cost Ratios
Utility BenefiUCost Ratio
Total Resource BenefiUCost Ratio
Program Characteristics
Program Jurisdiction
Program Inception
Idaho/Oregon
2003
2007
49
29,789,304
4
$3,032,047
$110,634
$19,185
$3,161,866
$0.012
$0.026
4.83
1.55
The Custom Efficiency program targets energy savings through the implementation of customized
energy effciency projects at customers' sites. The program is an opportity for large- and mid-sized
commercial and industrial customers in Idaho and Oregon to lower their electrical bils and receive
a financial incentive by completing energy efficient projects. Incentives enable companies to do projects
that might not be completed otherwise. Program offerings include training and education on energy
effciency, energy auditing services for project identification and evaluation, and financial incentives for
project implementation.
Interested customers submit applications to Idaho Power for potential projects that have been identified
by a third-party consultant, Idaho Power staff, or by the customer as applicable to their facility.
The applications must provide suffcient information to support the energy-savings calculations.
Project implementation begins after Idaho Power reviews and approves an application, followed by
the finalization of the terms and conditions ofthe applicant's and Idaho Power's obligations.
When possible, Idaho Power conducts on-site power monitoring and data collection, before and after
project implementation. The measurement and verification process ensures achievement of projected
energy savings. Verifying applicants' information confirms that demand reduction and energy savings
are obtained and within program guidelines.
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 43
Commercial/lndustrial Sector-Custom Efficiency Idaho Power Company
If changes in scope take place in a project, a recalculation of energy savings and incentive amounts
occurs, based on the actual installed equipment. Large, complex projects may take as long as two years
to complete.
In 2008, the minimum project size requirement increased from an annual 20,000 kWh to 100,000 kWh.
This change is expected to result in customers with smaller projects participating in other Idaho Power
energy efficiency programs, allowing greater Idaho Power resources to be focused on larger projects.
For smaller projects, or those with less complex retrofits, the Easy Upgrades or Building Efficiency
programs may be applicable. If a smaller project cannot be accommodated through other Idaho Power
energy effciency programs, the project may be completed under the Custom Effciency program,
subject to cost-effectiveness analysis. Incentive levels for the Custom Efficiency program remain at 70%
of the project cost, or $0. 12/kWh, whichever is less.
Key components in facilitating customer implementation of energy effciency projects are energy
auditing, customer training, and education services. The link between energy audits and the completion
of projects is historically significant; thus, Idaho Power continued expanding the number of contractors
available for customer scoping audits from four companies in 2007 to five companies in 2008.
Selection of engineering firms was based on the firm's expertise in all major equipment areas and their
ability to provide resources for customers throughout Idaho Power's service area.
The Custom Efficiency program achieved a high service area penetration rate. Through 2008,
approximately 50% of the large power service customers had submitted an application for a project.
Idaho Power reviewed and approved 135 applications for incentive projects in 2008. A total of
101 projects were completed in 2008 for 59 companies, including four Oregon projects.
Program energy savings increased in 2008 by 37% over.the prior year, from 29,789 MWh to
41,059 MWh. Additionally, completed projects increased by 106% and approved incentive applications
increased by 55%.
Table 7. Custom Efficiency Annual Energy Savings by Measure
Project Breakdowns
Lighting ......................................
Fan.............................................
Compressed Air.........................
Pump .........................................
Refrigeration............................. .
Other..........................................
Total
# of projects
57
12
11
4
6
11
101
kWh saved
15,300,158
11,399,810
6,612,292
717,068
3,554,444
3,474,867
41,058,639
Eleven more Oregon projects are scheduled for completion in 2009. In 2009, Idaho Power is expanding
the Custom Effciency program through a number of activities. These activities wil include direct
marketing of the Custom Efficiency program by Idaho Power field staff to inform the customers of
Page 44 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Commercial/lndustrial Sector-Custom Efficiency
the Idaho Power energy efficiency programs available and ways the customer can reduce energy costs.
Also, Idaho Power wil continue to provide site visits and energy audits for project identification,
technical training for customers, detailed energy audits for larger, complex projects, and delivery of
Industrial Efficiency Alliance (IEA)-sponsored continuous energy improvement practices to customers.
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 45
Commercial/lndustrial Sector-Easy Upgrades Idaho Power Company
Upg
Participation and Savings
Participants (projects)
Energy Savings (kWh)
Demand Reduction (MW)
Program Costs by Funding Source
Idaho Energy Effciency Rider
Oregon Energy Efficiency Rider
Idaho Power Funds
Total Program Costs-All Sources
Program levelized Costs
Utility Levelized Cost ($/kWh)
Total Resource Levelized Cost ($/kWh)
Program life Benefit/Cost Ratios
Utility Benefit/Cost Ratio
Total Resource Benefit/Cost Ratio
Program Characteristics
Program Jurisdiction
Program Inception
Idaho/Oregon
2006
2007
104
5,183,640
1
$680,376
$28,014
$3,105
$711,494
$0.015
$0.040
3.88
1.21
Available in the Idaho and Oregon Idaho Power service areas, the objective ofthe Easy Upgrades
program is to encourage commercial and industrial customers to implement energy efficiency retrofits
by offering incentives up to $100,000 per site. Eligible measures cover a variety of energy~saving
opportnities in lighting, HVAC, motors, building shell, plug loads, and grocery refrgeration.
Idaho Power commercial or industrial customers on Schedule 7 (Small General Service), Schedule 9
(Large General Service), Schedule 19 (Large Power Service), and special contracts are eligible.
Potential participants first assess their energy-saving opportnities by talking with their equipment
supplier, contractor, or Idaho Power service representative. For projects with expected incentive
payments of more than $1,000, applicants must submit a pre-app prior to initiating the project. In that
case, the customer completes the preliminary application (pre-app) form and submits it with relevant
worksheet(s), describing the location and planned scope of their project. Upon Idaho Power's review
and acceptance, the pre-app allows a customer to collect an incentive for up to 90 days for project
completion. For smaller projects with expected incentive payments ofless than $1,000, customers may
elect to skip the pre-app and just submit their final application for payment. These projects must have
been completed no more than six months prior to submitting their application for payment.
2008 Activities
In July, a special lighting incentive promotion was offered under Easy Upgrades. This promotion,
limited to Idaho customers, offered higher incentives for many lighting measures. A review of prior
Page 46 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Commercial/Industrial Sector-Easy Upgrades
lighting projects' actual operating hours justified the higher promotional incentive levels for the lighting
measures. An increased number of lighting project applications. occurred after the promotion. In Oregon,
an expanded state tax credit pass-through was offered in July for lighting projects. No apparent
additional activity was generated from the offer.
The special offer for VendingMiser™ installations, initiated in November 2007, concluded in
October 2008, with more than 3,600 units installed. An assessment of the VendingMiser installations
was conducted to determine if the units remained in place. After revisiting a sampling of the
installations, and correcting problems in some cases, the results showed that over 90% of the
VendingMisers were still in place and fuctioning within the year after installation.
Additionally, the Lighting Savings/Incentive Calculator became available on the Idaho Power Web site
in April 2008. The calculator helps customers determine the costs and benefits oftheir potential lighting
projects. Due to the lighting promotion and the online savings/incentive calculator, there was an increase
in applications received and projects completed.
Marketing activities included publishing "Success Stories" on the Idaho Power Web site, providing
workshops, and sponsoring events. Trade ally workshops continued through the spring and autumn.
Idaho Power sponsored events, including the Commercial Real Estate Symposium, an American Society
of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) technical conference, the second
annual Building Owners and Managers Association (BOMA) Energy Efficiency Workshop, and the
annual Idaho Energy and Green Building Conference. Additionally, Idaho Power presented payments at
incentive check ceremonies when requested by customers.
Idaho Power continued to sponsor the Lighting Design Lab (LDL) in Seattle through the Easy Upgrades
program. The LDL provides technical assistance and periodic local training seminars encouraging
energy saving lighting. Additionally, Idaho Power is a sponsor of NEE A's BetterBricks\I program,
disseminating general energy efficiency information to commercial customers.
Easy Upgrades conducts a regular follow-up regarding customer satisfaction. As of December 2008,
81 % of the program participants surveyed "strongly agree" they received excellent value through Easy
Upgrades, while 11 % of the respondents "somewhat agree." Additionally, 86% ofthe survey
respondents "strongly agree" that they received excellent service while 87% "strongly agree" their
experience when dealing with Idaho Power employees was positive.
The fall series workshops focused on stakeholder input regarding program change implementation for
2009. Based on input from stakeholders, plans for the upcoming year include significant program
changes. New measures eligible for incentives are being added, while others are being dropped.
Idaho Power customers will have 143 eligible measures in 2009, in contrast to the 129 offered in 2008.
Certain incentive levels and a few application requirements are scheduled to change in 2009.
Additionally, an electronic application form wil go online durng the upcoming year. To encourage
customers to use the electronic application, an additional incentive is being considered for each
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 47
Commercial/Industrial Sector-Easy Upgrades Idaho Power Company
electronic application submitted within a limited period. Details on program changes for 2009 and
additional "Success Stories" wil be available on the Idaho Power Web site in the spring of2009.
Generally, major program changes occur approximately every two years. A program evaluation is
planned for 2009. Results wil be available in early 2010, allowing incorporation of the results of
this evaluation into the program planning for 2011.
Page 48 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Commercial/lndustrial Sector-Holiday Lighting Program
Participation and Savings
Participants (projects)
Energy Savings (kWh)
Demand Reduction (MW)
Program Costs by Funding Source
Idaho Energy Efficiency Rider
Oregon Energy Efficiency Rider
Idaho Power Funds
Total Program Costs-All Sources
Program Levelized Costs
Utility Levelized Cost ($/kWh)
Total Resource Levelized Cost ($/kWh)
Program Life Benefit/Cost Ratios
Utilty BenefiUCost Ratio
Total Resource BenefiUCost Ratio
Program Characteristics
Program Jurisdiction
Program Inception
2.85
1.12
Idaho/Oregon
2008
2007
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
The overall goal of the Holiday Lighting Program is to encourage customers to purchase more efficient
light emitting diode (LED) holiday lights. Although the incentive is available only to commercial
customers, the program is useful as a means of introducing all Idaho Power customers to the advantages
of LED lighting. In doing this, Idaho Power is rapidly helping make LED lighting the preferred choice
when it comes to replacing existing holiday lights. In time, the exposure to commercial LED lighting
should filter into the residential market. Along with spreading the message of LED lighting's energy
efficiency, Idaho Power also informs customers about the safety benefits of using LED lights.
Activities
For the second year, Idaho Power offered an incentive for commercial customers to replace holiday
lighting with higher-effciency LED lighting. There was over a 700% increase in participation compared
to 2007, resulting in greatly increased savings. With its revitalization of the downtown and train depot
areas, the largest participant in 2008's program was the City of Caldwell. The city's holiday lighting
served as an excellent exposure to LED holiday lighting for a large number of viewers. In Boise,
the Idaho Botanical Gardens enlarged their Winter Garden Aglow holiday display, replacing nearly
53,000 incandescent lights with LED lights. Posted at the entrance to the Botanical Garden were signs
promoting energy and safety benefits of LED lights. It is estimated that over 29,000 visitors attended
the event.
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 49
Commercial/lndustrial Sector-Holiday Lighting Program Idaho Power Company
Many of the same marketing approaches will be used in 2009 to increase customer participation.
These promotional methods include providing materials in advance to chambers of commerce,
business and professional organizations, and participating trade allies. Idaho Power plans to coordinate
with municipalities and the Idaho Botanical Garden to support their LED-display efforts. A Holiday
Lighting bil stuffer will be sent in autumn 2009 to promote the program.
Page 50 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Commercialllndustrial Sector-OR Commercial Audits
Com Audits
Participation and Savings
Participants (audits)
Energy Savings (kWh)
Demand Reduction (MW)
Program Costs by Funding Source
Idaho Energy Efficiency Rider
Oregon Energy Efficiency Rider
Idaho Power Funds
Total Program Costs-All Sources
Program Levelized Costs Ratios
Utility Levelized Cost ($/kWh)
Total Resource Levelized Cost ($/kWh)
Program Life Benefit/Cost Ratios
Utilty Benefit/Cost Ratio
Total Resource Benefit/Cost Ratio
Program Characteristics
Program Jurisdiction
Program Inception
n/a
n/a
Oregon
1983
2007
8
n/a
n/a
$0
$1,800
$181
$1,981
n/a
n/a
The Oregon Commercial Audits program identifies opportnities for commercial building owners to
achieve energy savings. This is a statutory program offei;ed under Oregon Schedule No. 82.
Through this program, free energy audits offer evaluations and educational services to customers.
Annual mailings to each customer in the commercial sector communicate program benefits and
offerings.
The third-party energy auditing contract was renewed in 2008, with EnerTech Services providing
services through 201 1. Idaho Power sent out its annual mailing to all Oregon commercial customers in
December 2008. Customers were notified of the availability of no-cost energy audits and the Idaho
Power publication Saving Energy Dollars. Three customers requested this publication in 2008.
There were no energy audits conducted in 2008. However, ten customers requested an energy audit,
which wil be completed in 2009.
In 2009, as a method for introducing participants to additional energy effciency resources and practices,
the audit process wil be maximized by providing Idaho Power incentive information targeting specific
areas for improvement found in the audits. Idaho Power wil help customers turn their maintenance
requirements into energy saving opportities by providing energy efficiency information to
the customers.
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 51
Commercial/lndustrial Sector-OR Commercial Audits Idaho Power Company
This page left blank intentionally.
Page 52 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Irrigation Sector
SECTOR
ption
The irrgation sector is comprised of agricultural customers operating a water-pumping or water-delivery
system to irrgate agrcultural crops or pastuage. The end-use equipment primarily includes irrigation
pumps, pivots, fertilizer pumps, and drainage pumps. This customer group does not include water
pumping for non-agrcultural puroses, such as irrigation of lawns, parks, cemeteries, golf courses,
or domestic water supply.
The maximum number of active customers in 2008 was 17,428. In 2008, irrgation customers accounted
for 1,921,608 MWh of energy usage and 772 MW of peak demand. This sector represented about 13%
ofIdaho Power's total electricity usage and about 23% of peak demand.
Table 8. 2008 Irrigation Program Summary
Total Costs Savings
Program
Demand Response
Irrigation Peak Rewards. ..............
Participants Utilty Resource
(Number)(Units)(Dollars)(Dollars)
897 service $1,431,840 $189,492points
$1,431,840 $189,492
Annual
Energy
(kWh)
Summer
Peak
Demand
MW
nla 35
Total nla 35
Energy Effciency
Irrigation Effciency Rewards ........
Total
961 projects $2,103,702 $5,850,778 11,746,395
$2,103,702 $5,850,778 11,746,395
3
38
Note: See Appendix 3 for notes on methodology and column definitions.
Idaho Power currently offers two programs to the irrgation sector, 1) Irgation Peak Rewards,
a demand response program designed to decrease peak demand, and 2) the Irgation Efficiency
Rewards, an energy efficiency program designed to encourage replacement or improvement of
inefficient systems and components. Energy usage for this sector has not grown significantly in many
years; however, there is substantial yearly variation in demand due primarily to the impact of weather on
irrgation needs. There are about 200 new service locations added each year. The new locations are
typically smaller systems that are only pressurizing water. New for the Irgation Peak Rewards program
in 2009 is a dispatchable demand response option approved by the IPUC on January 14,2009.
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 53
Irrigation Sector-Irrigation Peak Rewards Idaho Power Company
Peak
Participation and Savings
Participants (service points)
Energy Savings (kWh)
Demand Reduction (MW)
Program Costs by Funding Source
Idaho Energy Efficiency Rider
Oregon Energy Efficiency Rider
Idaho Power Funds
Total Program Costs-All Sources
Program Levelized Costs
Utility Levelized Cost ($/kWh)
Total Resource Levelized Cost ($/kWh)
Program Life Benefit/Cost Ratios
Utility Benefit/Cost Ratio
Total Resource Benefit/Cost Ratio
Program Characteristics
Program Jurisdiction
Program Inception
Idaho/Oregon
2003
2007
947
n/a
37
$1,520,106
$54,747
$41,028
$1,615,881
n/a
n/a
1.15
1.15
Available to Idaho Power's Idaho and Oregon customers, the 2008 Irgation Peak Rewards program
was a voluntary progrm targeted toward agrcultural irrgation customers with pumps of75 horsepower
(Hp) or greater. The program objective is reduction of peak electrical load durng summer, weekday
afternoons. In exchange for a financial incentive, preprogrammed electronic time activated switches tu
off the pumps of participating irrgation customers durng intervals predetermined by Idaho Power.
Participants select one of three different options for the months of June, July, and August. A monthly
demand credit is associated with each of the one-, two-, or three-day options and is paid based on
the participating customer's monthly biling demand. Electronic timers are programmed to turn
irrigation pumps off during preprogrammed times associated with the selected option. The following
three options and associated demand credit incentives were available to customers from 4:00 to
8:00 p.m. on weekdays: 1) one day per week, $2.01 per kW demand, 2) two days per week, $3.36 per
kW demand, or 3) three days per week, $4.36 per kW demand. Incentive amounts are credited to the
monthly biling demand at each customer's metered service point. Customers with pumps of 75-99 Hp
pay a one-time $250 installation fee to help offset the cost ofthe switches and maintain the program's
cost effectiveness.
2008
Idaho Power provided five workshops promoting the Irgation Peak Rewards program across
the service area. Additionally, a list of each customer's pumps, information for estimating potential
incentives on each pump, and a program application was mailed to every eligible irrgation customer.
Page 54 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Irrigation Sector-Irrigation Peak Rewards
Other marketing efforts included providing an Idaho Power exhibitor booth at regional agrcultual trade
shows, such as the Eastern and Western Idaho Agriculture Expos, the United Dairymen of Idaho Expo,
the Agri-Action Ag show, the Idaho Farm Bureau convention, and the Idaho Irigation Equipment
Association show and convention. In 2008, several meetings occurred with the Idaho Irgation Pumpers
Association, IPUC staff, and customers regarding proposed changes to the program for 2009,
which include a dispatchable demand response option. In December 2008, the Irrgation Peak Rewards
Program Report was submitted to the IPUC. The report describes program results, costs, and savings for
2008.
A dispatchable demand response option was approved by the IPUC on Januar 14,2009, and the OPUC
on February 25,2009. The proposal included modifications to the Irrgation Peak Rewards program for
2009. A shorter program operating time throughout the summer, from June 15 to August 15, was
proposed. Idaho Power plans to make the program available to all agricultural customers receiving
service under Irrgation Rate Schedule 24 in 2009, potentially leading to greater energy demand and
increased customer participation.
The program marketing strategy includes sponsoring 7 to 10 program update workshops across Idaho
Power's service area, covering new program offerings and demonstrating the new technology operating
the dispatchable demand response option. Simultaneously, customer mailings to all eligible customers
wil provide a detailed explanation of the program offerings and increase awareness of the significant
changes to the program. Additionally, one-on-one training with Idaho Power agrculture representatives
will familiarize customers with the new technology and program details. Results of the program wil be
reported in the 2009 Irrgation Peak Rewards Report.
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 55
Irrigation Sector-Irrigation Efficiency Rewards Idaho Power Company
Rewards
Participation and Savings
Participants (projects)
Energy Savings (kWh)
Demand Reduction (MW)
Program Costs by Funding Source
Idaho Energy Efficiency Rider
Oregon Energy Efficiency Rider
Idaho Power Funds
Total Program Costs-All Sources
Program Levelized Costs
Utility Levelized Cost ($/kWh)
Total Resource Levelized Cost ($/kWh)
Program Life Benefit/Cost Ratios
Utility Benefit/Cost Ratio
Total Resource Benefit/Cost Ratio
Program Characteristics
Program Jurisdiction
Program Inception
Idaho/Oregon
2003
2007
819
12,304,073
3
$1,881,116
$93,924
$26,922
$2,001,961
$0.024
$0.103
5.49
1.64
The Irgation Efficiency Rewards program encourages energy effcient equipment and design in
irrigation systems. Irrgators in Idaho Power's Idaho and Oregon service area can receive financial
incentives and reduce their electric bils. Idaho Power helps qualified irrgators pay for energy efficiency
features in their irrigation system and helps them use electricity efficiently. Incentives for the Irgation
Effciency Rewards program helps the customer recover the costs of installation of a new, more efficient
irrgation system and energy effcient improvements to an existing irrgation system.
Two separate reward options help meet the needs for major or minor changes on new or existing
systems. The Custom Incentive Option addresses extensive retrofits of existing systems or new irrgation
systems, providing component upgrades and large-scale improvements. For new systems, the incentive
is $0.25 per kWh saved above standard installation methods, not to exceed 10% oftotal project cost.
For existing system upgrades, the incentive is $0.25 per kWh saved or $450 per kW, whichever is
greater, not to exceed 75% ofthe total project cost. Idaho Power reviews, analyzes, and makes
recommendations on each application. On each completed project, before final payment, all project
information is re-evaluated. Prior usage history, actual invoices, and, in many situations, post-usage
demand data, are used to calculate savings and incentives.
The Menu Incentive Option covers a significant portion of the costs of repairing and replacing specific
components that help the irrgation system use less energy. This option is designed for systems in which
small maintenance upgrades provide energy savings. Incentives vary based on specific component
replacement.
Page 56 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Irrigation Sector-Irrigation Efficiency Rewards
Payments are calculated on predetermined average kWh savings per component. Idaho Power reviews
and analyzes each proposal for a system or component modification, determining and verifying
the energy savings.
In addition to incentives, the program offers customer education, training, and irrgation-system
assessments. Idaho Power agricultural representatives sponsor, coordinate, conduct, and present
educational workshops for irrgation customers, providing expert information and training across Idaho
Power's service area. Energy audits, conducted by Idaho Power agrcultural representatives,
evaluate prospective customers' potential savings. Agricultural representatives from Idaho Power also
engage agricultural irrgation equipment dealers in training sessions, increasing awareness of
the program and promoting it through the irrigation equipment distribution channels. Marketing efforts
include direct mailings, advertisements in agricultural publications, and agricultural trade show
paricipation.
Idaho Power provided five workshops promoting the Irrgation Efficiency Reward program across
the service area. The program had an Idaho Power exhibitor booth at regional agrcultural trade shows,
including the Eastern and Western Idaho Agrculture Expos, the United Dairyen of Idaho Expo,
Agri-Action Ag show, the Idaho Farm Bureau convention, and the Idaho Irrgation Equipment
Association show and convention.
Marketing plans for 2009 include conducting seven to 10 irrgation workshops. These workshops enable
discussions between Idaho Power representatives and customers, while continually educating customers
about the program and ways to participate.
All agricultural customers in Idaho Power's service area are eligible for the Irrgation Efficiency Reward
program. The Irrigation Effciency Reward program has little room for expansion within the customer
class, though additional energy-saving measures may expand as technology becomes available.
The market is becoming saturated to some extent, though there is still potential in this large market.
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 57
Irrigation Sector-Irrigation Efficiency Rewards Idaho Power Company
This page left blank intentionally.
Page 58 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Market Transformation-NEEA
nergy AI (NEEA)
NEEA encourages and supports cost-effective market transformation efforts in Idaho, Oregon,
Washington, and Montana. Through partnerships with local utilities, NEEA motivates marketplace
adoption of energy-saving services and technologies and encourages regional education and marketing
platforms. NEEA provides training and marketing resources across residential, commercial,
and industrial sectors. Idaho Power accomplishes market transformation in its service area through
membership and coordinated activities with NEEA.
Industrial Efficiency Allance (lEA) Activities in Idaho
The IEA is a multi-year strategic effort designed to improve energy efficiency in two regional industres
considered heavy energy users, 1) the food processing and 2) the pulp and paper industries.
Although Idaho Power does not have any pulp and paper customers, because of the large number of food
processing customers, Idaho Power considers participation in IEA valuable. The IEA also works with
companies that produce equipment and provide services for these industries and with the utilities that
serve them.
Participants achieve cost savings through the adoption of energy-efficient business practices. The IEA
provides expert support, resources, and services, providing companies with the training and tools for
making energy effciency a core business value. Participants are asked for a commitment to
a Continuous Energy Improvement Program, which potentially increases production capacity,
improves equipment reliability, and reduces operating costs and energy use by 5% to 20%. This effort is
supported by providing technical knowledge for individuals, organizations, and manufacturing
companies collaborating on energy efficiency implementation. IEA members include the BP A, regional
utilities, the Energy Trust of Oregon (ETO), the Oregon Department of Energy (ODOE), and the Idaho
Offce of Energy Resources (OER).
Training activity in 2008 increased over 2007 and included eight industrial workshops co~sponsored by
the IEA, Idaho Power, and others. Topics focused on pumps, compressed air, motors, and industral
refrigeration. A market progress evaluation of the IEA was completed in May 2008.
Commercial Allance Activities in Idaho
NEEA continued to provide support for commercial energy efficient activities in Idaho in 2008.
NEEA continued fuding the Boise Integrated Design Lab (IDL) and local BetterBricks\I trainings and
workshops. NEEA sponsored Idaho's Fourth Annual BetterBricks Awards, issued in October in
conjunction with the Idaho Energy & Green Building Conference. Idaho Power's commercial programs,
Building Effciency and Easy Upgrades, are designed to leverage NEEA, BetterBricks, and Boise IDL
activities.
Distribution Efficiency Initiative
In 2008, Idaho Power continued to paricipate with other northwest utilities in NEEA's Distrbution
Efficiency Initiative (DEI) project study.
Demand~Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 59
Market Transformation-NEEA Idaho Power Company
Phase I Projects Completed
NEEA conducted a DEI project study, which included a Load Research project and Pilot Demonstration
projects. The Load Research project was designed to establish the relationship between applied voltage
and energy, in addition to how applied voltage affects demand for different end-use load types, such as
electric heating, electric water heating, and air conditioning. The Pilot Demonstration projects controlled
the voltage at the substation in order to determine the performance of different efficiency methods.
Phase i Concluded in 2007
The NEEA study's final report shows that operating a utility distribution system in the lower half of
the acceptable voltage range of 120 through 114 volts saves energy (kWh), reduces demand (kW),
and reduces reactive power (i.e., kilovolt ampere reactive (kvar)) requirements without negatively
impacting the customer. The energy-savings results are within the expected values of 1 % to 3% total
energy reduction, 2% to 4% reduction in kW demand, and a 4% to 10% reduction in kvar demand.
As part of the completion of this project, the 66 Home Voltage Regulators (HVRs) operating in southern
Idaho since March 2006 were removed during the summer of 2007. The purpose of the HVR was to
adjust service entrance voltage at the residence.
Project for 2007
A new pilot was implemented during the second quarter of2007 to demonstrate remote end-of-feeder
control of the station transformer load-tap changer. The project used wireless communication between
the end-of-feeder and the substation to adjust the substation voltage based on the measured
end-of-feeder voltage. Application of technology allows better control of the end-of-feeder voltage.
In December 2007, R. W. Beck, Inc., a contractor for NEEA, published the Northwest Energy
Efficiency Alliance Distribution Efficiency Initiative Project Final Report. This report and additional
information about DEI is available at htt://rwbeck.comlneea. The estimated, annual project savings
were reported to be 8,563 MWh.
Project for 2008
In 2008, the remote end-of-feeder control of the station transformer load-tap changer project was
changed from a pilot project to a permanent installation. In addition, studies began to identify additional
locations to implement the techniques identified in the pilot study. The initial phase will include
locations that can be converted with minimal or no capital expenditures. Futue phases will be
those locations that require more extensive resources to implement.
In 2008, DEI Calculators, which are Excel-based tools, were completed and presented to the RTF.
These calculators include a manager's tool that provides high-level results and an engineer's tool that
allows users to develop multiple scenarios and compare results. These tools were developed to be used
primarily by smaller utilities that mayor may not have the resources to do the analysis necessary to
implement a DEI-based project.
Residential NEEA Activities in Idaho
NEEA continues to provide support for the ENERGY STAR\I Homes Northwest program offered by
Idaho Power. NEEA offers technical assistance, funding for certifications, and builder and marketing
support.
Page 60 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Market Transformation-NEEA
Other NEEA Activities in Idaho
In 2008, Idaho Power participated in two major studies in Idaho Power's service area. The ENERGY
STAR Homes Northwest impact evaluation continued throughout 2008 with final results available in
2009. Idaho Power assisted NEEA in developing the sample plan for this study and provided data
necessary to assess the program. The impact evaluation required that ENERGY STAR certified homes
were audited and had measurement and verification equipment installed.
Idaho Power participated with NEEA to conduct a Commercial Building Stock Assessment (CBSA).
The purpose of this study was to update the original CBSA completed in 2003. Idaho Power contracted
with the Cadmus Group to over-sample buildings in Idaho Power's service area to gather more detailed
information to enhance program planning in the commercial sector. Idaho Power provided data and
assisted the contractor in reviewing the commercial-building characteristics in Idaho Power's service
area.
Each year, NEEA underwrites the Idaho Energy Conference through a contract with the Association of
Idaho Cities. NEEA continues to provide general information support to the region by funding
the EnergyIdeas Clearinghouse\I and ConWeb\I.
NEEA funded a variety of research projects that were reported on in 2008. These reports are valuable to
Idaho Power in that they provide information for creating and evaluating Idaho Power's programs.
These research projects included Baseline Characteristics of the 2002-2004 Nonresidential Sector of
Idaho, Montana, Oregon, and Washington. They also included Market Research Reports for ENERGY
STAR Homes Northwest Focus Groups, Residential Ductless Heat Pump Market Research and
Analysis, Residential New Construction Biling Analysis, Analysis of Window Energy Savings in
Commercial Buildings in the Northwest, ENERGY STAR Consumer Products Lighting Project,
80 PLUS Personal Computer Power Supplies, and seven reports on the BetterBricks initiative in
the commercial sector.
NEEA
In 2005, Idaho Power began the first year of the 2005-2009 contract and funding agreement with
NEEA. Per this agreement, Idaho Power committed to fund $1.3 milion annually in support of NEE A's
implementation of market transformation programs in Idaho Power's service area. Ofthis amount in
2008, 72% was funded through the Idaho and Oregon Riders, and 28% was funded by a credit
accumulated during the previous contract period.
In 2008, Idaho Power paid $942,014 to NEEA. The Idaho jurisdictional share ofthe payments was
$894,913.31, while $47,100.69 was paid for the Oregon jurisdiction. Other expenses associated with
NEEA activities, such as administration and travel, were paid by Idaho Power.
Preliminary estimates reported by NEEA indicate that Idaho Power's share of regional market
transformation MWh savings for 2008 is 32,672 MWh, or 3.7 aMW. Idaho Power relies on NEEA to
report the energy savings and other benefits of NEE A's regional portfolio of initiatives. For further
information about NEEA, visit their Web site at ww.nwallance.org.
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 61
Market Transformation-NEEA Idaho Power Company
This page left blank intentionally.
Page 62 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Energy Efficiency Advisory Group
G (E )
Formed in May 2002, the EEAG provides input on formulating and implementing energy effciency and
demand-reduction programs funded by the Rider. Currently, the EEAG consists of 12 members from
across Idaho Power's service area and the Pacific Northwest. Members represent a cross-section of
customers, including individuals from the residential, industral, commercial, and irrgation sectors, as
well as representatives for the elderly, low-income, environmental organizations, state agencies, public
utility commissions, and Idaho Power.
In 2008, the EEAG met three times: February 7, May 13, and October 2. During the meetings, Idaho
Power requested recommendations on new program proposals, provided a status of the Rider funding
and expenses, updated ongoing programs and projects, and supplied information on DSM issues.
The following section provides an overview of topics addressed during the meetings and a review of
the input provided to Idaho Power by the EEAG regarding major program implementation and
operational issues in 2008. Various operational DSM programs were reviewed by EEAG during
the 2008 meetings. Only substantial changes or modifications associated with EEAG input and new
programs and pilots are presented in the following.
Residential programs reviewed in 2008 included the Home Products Program, Heating & Cooling
Efficiency Program, ENERGY STAR\I Homes Northwest, and AlC Cool Credit. Progress updates were
provided on the Holiday Lighting Program, Idaho Green Expo, and Energy Effcient Lighting program.
Pilots started in 2008, and new programs for 2009, including the Attic Insulation Pilot and the Home
Weatherization Pilot, and the 2009 Refrigerator Recycling Program, were also discussed.
The Home Products Program targets changing consumer purchases from regular appliances to ENERGY
STAR qualified appliances. Initially Idaho Power considered three types of appliances to include in this
program. Ultimately, clothes washers were the only appliance that met the cost-effectiveness tests.
The Consortium for Energy Efficiency, Inc. (CEE) rates the energy efficiency of home appliances,
including residential clothes washers. CEE rates clothes washers as tier 1, tier 2, or tier 3, with tier 3
being the most efficient. However, the CEE tier ratings are not readily apparent to customers. Due to this
diffculty of letting the public know about the difference in the tier levels of washers, Idaho Power was
considering one incentive amount regardless of the ENERGY STAR qualified washer purchased.
Recommendations
Members discussed reasonable incentive amounts and recommended an incentive of $50 for either Tier I
or Tier II clothes washers be offered. Idaho Power was advised to consider joining with water suppliers
or wastewater companies to add an educational piece to the incentive.
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 63
Energy Efficiency Advisory Group Idaho Power Company
Action
Effective April 2008, the $50 clothes washer incentive was offered for either tier clothes washers.
Washer purchases made after April 2008 qualified for Idaho customers, and washer purchases made
after May 21,2008 qualified for Oregon customers. The ENERGY STAR Appliance program was
renamed the Home Products Program in August 2008 and expanded to include ENERGY STAR
qualified refrigerators, ceiling fans with light kits, or ceiling fan light kit attachments.
Idaho Power staff met with the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) to discuss how to
educate water~system operators regarding Idaho Power energy efficiency programs. Many of the water
systems use pump configurations similar to irrgation. There might be opportnities for the users to
participate in Idaho Power Commercial energy effciency programs and receive incentives for upgrading
pumps or, for larger systems, performing facility upgrades. Discussions included the possibility of
putting information in the state drinking and wastewater newsletters.
Idaho Power proposed to the EEAG two program management options for conducting the Refrgerator
Recycling program. The first option was through an internal program managed and operated completely
by Idaho Power, while the second option was through a contract with a third-party for management and
operation of the program. Pros and cons of the two options were discussed. Under the Idaho
Power-operated program, participating customers would be responsible for removal and disposal of
the old refrigerator. Some members felt that might be challenging and prohibitive for customers,
especially the elderly. The EEAG group favored the third-party management option, where the third-
party contractor handles the removal and disposal of the old unit. The third-party contractor could also
conduct the verification of the condition of the old unit. Though an internally managed program was the
more cost-effective option, EEAG thought that the third-party management option might attract higher
participation levels.
Recommendations
The EEAG recommended that Idaho Power pursue a third-party contractor for program implementation
and offer the program in Oregon.
Action
Idaho Power plans to issue a request for proposal (RFP) for a third-party contractor to operate the
program. After the RFP is received and reviewed, a potential successful contractor will be selected and a
contract negotiated. Program implementation is planned for May 2009. Idaho Power plans to offer
a $30 refrigerator incentive to customers recycling working refrigerators.
Attic
Idaho Power presented to the EEAG a potential program structue for the Attic Insulation Pilot. Potential
energy savings, incentives, data collection, and timelines were discussed.
Pag.e 64 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Energy Efficiency Advisory Group
Recommendations
Data collection suggestions included taking spot measures from the air handler and measuring attic
temperatures and compressor ru-time for air conditioners. Other suggestions included checking
the ductwork prior to insulation.
Action
The Attic Insulation Pilot program was launched. It offered customers a $0.15 per square foot incentive
for the professional installation of additional attic insulation. The pilot was conducted in Boise,
Twin Falls, and Pocatello. Installations began in May 2008 and were completed by mid-July. Idaho
Power collected indoor and outdoor temperatures and compressor runtimes. Also collected was
information on the physical characteristics of the participants' homes, including the pre- and
post-installed insulation R-values.
Information from the pilot was used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the potential program. It was
determined that this was a cost-effective program opportnity. As a result of the Attic Insulation Pilot,
Idaho Power will proceed in 2009 with the pilot, renamed the Home Improvement Program.
Home
Introduced in 2008 was a new Home Weatherization Pilot concept, which targeted customers who
applied for, but were deemed ineligible for participation in, W AQC and who are probably not likely to
participate in other programs. Idaho Power collaborated with Home Energy Management, LLC, to
complete 20 homes in 2008 in the Twin Falls area. Like the W AQC program, there is no cost to the
customer. After the weatherization projects are completed, Idaho Power will complete the verification
and analysis process, comparing the current SIR with Idaho Power cost-effectiveness models.
The differences between the existing WAQC program and the pilot are the pilot's higher income
eligibility criteria and that federal dollars cannot be leveraged in the pilot. The guidelines for the pilot
resemble WAQC guidelines in all other aspects. Using the pilot structure allows Idaho Power to proceed
and evaluate the results to determine utility costs.
Recommendations
Members expressed support of the pilot.
Action
The pilot was launched during the last quarter of 2008. Energy Management, LLC, weatherized
16 homes for the pilot. Energy savings achieved were 71,680 kWh/year. The average home saved
4,480 kWh/year. Total costs were $52,807. Average individual project cost was $3,300. Based on
the pilot, Idaho Power plans to expand in 2009 and weatherize 60 homes in Idaho Power's southern
region service area under the newly named Weatherization Solutions for Eligible Customers program.
Commercial and Ind Programs
At the October EEAG meeting, Idaho Power presented the Commercial Demand Response program and
the Small Commercial AlC Cycling Pilot program. Updates were also provided on the Easy Upgrades
program changes.
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 65
Energy Efficiency Advisory Group Idaho Power Company
Idaho Power proposed the Commercial Demand Response program where Idaho Power would contract
with a third-party demand response aggregator for provision of peak load reduction. The third-party
would recruit customers and guarantee Idaho Power a determined amount of peak load reduction at a
contracted price.
Recommendations
The third-party contractor selected for the program should tailor their program to Idaho Power's service
area commercial customers.
Action
Idaho Power issued an RFP in August for a demand response aggregator. Four proposals were received
and reviewed. Idaho Power selected EnerNOC as the contractor. EnerNOC provides demand response
services for numerous other utility companies throughout the United States, has established relationships
with the many businesses in Idaho Power's service area, and understands the unique characteristics of
Idaho Power's customers. Idaho Power and EnerNOC have negotiated a contract to reduce peak demand
at critical times. The aggregator wil negotiate contracts directly with Idaho Power commercial and
industrial customers to achieve the contracted demand reduction. Analysis has shown that this program
wil be cost-effective. Pending IPUC approval, Idaho Power expects to launch the commercial demand
response program in 2009.
Ale
Idaho Power introduced a proposed demand response program for small commercial users. Demand
reduction would be achieved by controlling customers' use of air conditioners using programmable
thermostats. It is similar to the residential AlC Cool Credit program, except it is designed for small
commercial customers using less than 2,000 kWh per month. Under this proposed program, there would
not be a customer bill credit, as there is in the residential program, and the customer's benefit would be
the provided programmable thermostat and installation.
Recommendations
Given the high cost of serving the summer peak hours, it was requested that Idaho Power consider
aggressively launching the program and, if possible, incorporate a lighting retrofit along with the
progrmmable thermostat.
Action
The cost-effectiveness analysis of a small commercial AlC Cycling program is under review.
The proposed implementation and administrative costs are higher than initially expected. The potential
for cost-effective peak load reduction in the market is uncertain. Idaho Power believes a pilot program to
study the energy impacts is needed. Idaho Power is renegotiating with vendors, exploring additional
program offerings, and considering including the small commercial program in the curent residential
AlC Cool Credit program. Through these efforts, Idaho Power is attempting to design a cost-effective
program.
Page 66 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Energy Effciency Advisory Group
Prog
The redesigned Irrigation Peak Rewards program was introduced at the October 2, 2008, EEAG
meeting. Idaho Power proposed the Irgation Peak Rewards program include a dispatchable demand
response option.
This program would be offered to Idaho Power customers in Idaho and Oregon. Three options would be
available for customers to choose between: 1) the currently offered timer option, 2) a dispatchable
option that allows Idaho Power to remotely turn participants' pumps on or off, or 2) a large service
location option that allows participating customers, after being notified by Idaho Power, to turn large
horsepower pumps off during summer peak hours. High savings and benefits are expected from this new
program.
Recommendations
Based on the success of the current Irgation Peak Rewards program and the potential for substantially
increased cost-effective peak-demand reduction, the EEAG recommended that Idaho Power expand the
program. A dispatchable irrgation demand response option could be implemented for irrigation
customers in 2009.
Actions
Expanding on the current Irgation Peak Rewards program, Idaho Power developed a new program that
offers three options for eligible service locations in Idaho and Oregon. The first option wil continue
with a timer option. The second, new dispatchable option allows Idaho Power to remotely tu on and
off participating customers' pumps. Under the third option, for large service locations of 1,000 or
greater, participants would manually turn their pumps on and off. The combination of these three
options enables Idaho Power to substantially decrease demand during peak load hours.
On January 14,2009, the IPUC approved the program proposal. In February 2009, Idaho Power began
sending mailings to irrigation customers and holding workshops to educate irrgation customers and
market the new program offering.
Add Covered
In the EEAG meetings, Idaho Power presented additional topics, including an overview of the Demand-
Side Management 2007 Annual Report, the report's strcture, and 2007 programs documented in the
report. EEAG was updated throughout the year regarding the Rider balance and energy effciency
program performance.
In 2008, as the result of an RFP process, Idaho Power hired a consultant company, Nexant, for a DSM
potential study regarding creating or expanding programs. Preliminary findings from this report
indicated that, within the residential sector, there was a limited amount of additional energy savings
potential beyond what Idaho Power is currently offering.
Recommendations
A peer review of the results ofthe Nexant report 2008 market potential study was recommended.
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 67
Energy Efficiency Advisory Group Idaho Power Company
Action
A peer review was initiated and results are due in the spring of2009.
Page 68 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Other Programs and Activities
OTH AN
Res E Initiative
Idaho Power recognizes the value of general energy efficiency awareness and education in creating
behavior change and customer demand for, and satisfaction with, its programs. The Residential Energy
Efficiency Education initiative's goal is promoting energy efficiency to the residential community
sector. This goal is achieved by creating and delivering educational programs that result in
energy-efficient and conservation-oriented behaviors and choices.
The Residential Energy Efficiency Education initiative distributed energy effciency messages through
a variety of communication methods during 2008. Increased customer awareness of energy-saving ideas
was accomplished via distribution of over 8,000 copies of the 96-page book 30 Simple Things You Can
Do To Save Energy, a joint publishing project between Idaho Power and The Earthworks Group. In
June, an Energy Efficiency Guide outlining the residential programs and monthly tips was published in
area newspapers. Energy Awareness month, held in October, included a jointly sponsored energy
efficiency exhibit at the Discovery Center, a newspaper campaign, and the Fall Energy Efficiency &
Green Livings Series. Held at the Boise Public Library, this five-class series promoting energy
efficiency was initiated in 2007. This year's topics included an open dialogue with energy leaders;
simple no- and low-cost ways to save energy; easy ways to re-think, reduce, reuse, and recycle; how to
landscape for energy savings; and how to remodel existing homes and build new homes consistent with
the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) and Northwest ENERGY STAR\I Homes
Northwest standards. The five sessions combined attacted 147 participants.
The Residential Energy Effciency Education initiative collected participant evaluations at the end of
each of the five classes focusing on energy efficiency held at the Boise Public Library during 2008.
Combined, the five sessions had 147 participants and a survey retu rate of 51 %. The majority of
respondents indicated they "strongly agreed" that the information was useful and met their expectations.
The majority of respondents indicated they "definitely would" recommend the class to family and
friends.
During the fourth quarter of 2008, Idaho Power provided weekly energy efficiency messages on
The HomeFix Show with Joe Prin on 580 KIDO AM. Another media campaign around energy-efficient
gift purchases rounded out the year.
In addition to these activities, Idaho Power sponsored the Energy Conservation and Recycling track at
the first annual Idaho Green Expo. Specialists from Idaho Power presented three workshops and
addressed attendees' questions at the Idaho Power's exhibitor booth. Durng 2008, Idaho Power
developed a new educational program for fourth- to sixth-grade students. "Simple Ways to Save
Energy" is a 45-60 minute presentation focusing on energy-efficient actions within each child's ability.
Idaho Power further increased its energy effciency presence in the community by providing program
information at events such as Teachers' Night Out, Idaho Smart Growth, and the St. Luke's Women's
Show.
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 69
Other Programs and Activities Idaho Power Company
Plans for 2009 include expanding the Energy Efficiency & Green Livings Series to other customers
outside the Treasure Valley. Adult energy efficiency presentations for corporate and community settings
are being developed for use by Idaho Power staff. Energy efficiency displays such as three-dimensional
demonstration devices, brochures, and other educational materials wil be developed in 2009.
Placing stand-alone energy effciency displays in high-traffic public venues, such as libraries and
corporate lobbies, is another method Idaho Power intends to use to reach large numbers of customers
with energy effciency messages.
I Education In
Idaho Power launched its Commercial Education initiative in the spring of 2008. The main objectives of
this initiative are to educate commercial customers about energy efficiency, increase participation in
existing commercial energy efficiency and demand-reduction programs, enhance customer satisfaction,
and reduce energy use. In 2008, Idaho Power identified methods for educating customers about energy
efficiency and addressed ways of changing customer practices and behaviors.
The initiative made progress in helping commercial customers, trade allies, field staff, professional
organizations, and community organizations indentify common problems or energy efficiency
opportnities. Potential solutions and ideas were addressed through networking with energy information
sources, such as E Source, Idaho Power staff, trade allies, and customers. For example, many customers
have been very successful in reducing their energy usage by utilizing Idaho Power incentive programs.
Subsequently, customers have invited Idaho Power field staff and other customers with similar facilities
to visit their projects and see, firsthand, successful energy effciency projects.
In 2009, the initiative wil continue its efforts in commercial customer education. Plans are to increase
the focus on providing commercial customers with information pertinent to their facilities and
operational constraints and to identify resources for achievement of their energy effciency objectives.
Local E Fu (LEEF)
The purpose ofLEEF, formerly called the Small Projects and Education Fund, is to provide modest
funding for short-term projects and activities that do not fit within other categories of energy efficiency
programs, but that still provide a defined benefit to furthering DSM targets.
Two projects were paid for from this fund in 2008. In spring 2007, MHAFB applied for fuds to remove
incandescent lighting from an outdoor running track and replace them with solar lighting. A cost-
effective analysis was completed for the project in 2007 and permission was provided by Idaho Power
for the AFB to move forward. The actual lighting was installed in the summer of 2008, and LEEF funds
paid $13,764 for 114,700 kWh savings per year.
Another completed project in 2008 was in a Marsing home. The owner created a "Living Wall"
consisting of hundreds of plants blanketing a wall and floor. The plants serve as an air conditioner,
decreasing the air temperature around the "Living Wall" and reducing energy use by up to 20% per
month. LEEF funds paid $450 for 1,231 kWh savings per year.
Page 70 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Regulatory Initiatives
REGULATORY I
Idaho Power is testing the effects of a Fixed Cost Adjustment (FCA) and a Performance-Based DSM
Incentive as part of a three-year, two-pilot initiative. The two pilots are being operated on a limited basis
to allow for a thorough evaluation to be conducted prior to a broader application of the financial
mechanisms. 2007 was the first year of the pilots. Actual performance and usage data from 2007 was
evaluated during the spring of 2008, and Idaho Power made the following fiings in response to the
first-year results.
Adj
Under the FCA, rates are annually adjusted up or down to recover or refund the difference between the
fixed costs authorized by the IPUC in the most recent rate case and the fixed costs that Idaho Power
actually received the previous year through energy sales. This decoupling mechanism removes the
financial disincentive that exists when Idaho Power invests in DSM resources. The FCA pilot is limited
to the residential and small commercial classes in recognition of the fact that, for these customers, a high
percentage of fixed costs are recovered through energy charges. Confining the pilot to the residential and
small commercial classes also allows the true-up mechanism to be tested on a limited basis to minimize
any unintended consequences. On March 12,2007, the IPUC authorized a three-year pilot of the FCA
under Order No. 30267.
On March 14, 2008, Idaho Power filed an application to implement FCA rates reflecting 2007 actual
data. According to the application, during 2007, the average energy use per residential customer
increased. Idaho Power collected approximately $3.5 million more for its fixed costs than was .
established in the agreed-upon residential FCA formula. The application also indicated that the small
commercial class saw a decrease in per-customer energy use during 2007. This means Idaho Power
under-collected approximately $1.1 million of its fixed costs for this customer class. On May 30, 2008,
the IPUC issued Order No. 30556 directing Idaho Power to collect the net fixed cost adjustment of
$2.4 milion and to distribute the rate adjustment across both residential and small commercial
customers. This action resulted in a rate reduction of 0.045676 cents/kWh, effective June 1,2008,
through May 31, 2009, for all residential and small commercial customers. On March 13,2009,
Idaho Power wil fie an application to implement FCA rates reflecting 2008 actual data.
DSM I Pi
To complement the FCA pilot, Idaho Power is testing the effects of a Performance-Based DSM
Incentive mechanism. On March 12,2007, the IPUC issued Order No. 30268 authorizing the
implementation of a Performance-Based DSM Incentive pilot that allows Idaho Power to retain a portion
of the financial benefits resulting from DSM activities when energy savings targets are exceeded.
Should it fail to meet energy savings levels previously achieved, Idaho Power is subject to a penalty
under the incentive pilot. During the pilot period, the incentive mechanism is being applied only to the
ENERGY STAR Homes Northwest Program. By applying this mechanism on a limited basis,
Idaho Power is able to gain a better understanding of the effects of a performance incentive while
minimizing the potential impact to customers. Idaho Power ultimately intends to use the information
gained during the pilot period to develop a performance-based incentive mechanism that can be applied
to the entire portfolio of DSM programs.
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 71
Regulatory Initiatives Idaho Power Company
On March 14, 2008, Idaho Power filed the actual 2007 data in the Performance-Based Demand-Side
Management Incentive Pilot Performance Update. According to the final ENERGY STAR Homes
Northwest program results for 2007, Idaho Power has estimated the program achieved a market share
of 5%. This value is within the market share dead-band established for 2007 at 5.0% to 7.0%, and,
therefore, Idaho Power is not eligible for a performance incentive nor is Idaho Power subject to a
penalty.
Page 72 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Enhanced Commitment
ENHANCED MITMENT
As part of the FCA implementation process, Idaho Power is committed to enhancing its efforts toward
promoting energy effciency. Idaho Power's overall DSM performance last year is an indication ofthis
commitment. In 2008, the energy savings from Idaho Power's DSM in-house programs increased 54%
over 2007 levels while expenditures increased only 35%. In several other key areas, Idaho Power
actively pursued numerous, additional opportnities to promote energy efficiency, including, but not
limited to:
· Broad availability of effciency and load management programs
· Building code improvement activity
· Pursuit of appliance code standards
· Continued expansion ofDSM programs beyond peak-shaving/load-shifting programs
· Third-party verification
· Promotion of energy effciency through electricity rate design
· Idaho Power's internal energy efficiency commitment
Through its DSM portfolio, Idaho Power now offers programs in virtally every major market segment
in its service area. For residential customers, there are programs for new homes, existing homes, and
lower-income buildings. In the commercial and industrial sectors, there are programs in both the new
and existing building market segments. In the irrgation sector, Idaho Power offers incentives for
existing systems and new irrgation systems. Furthermore, Idaho Power has implemented demand
response programs in the residential and irrigation sectors and plans to implement a new demand
response program in the commercial and industral sector in 2009. The specific programs added,
modified, or expanded in 2008 include:
· A new Home Weatherization Pilot launched in the Twin Falls area in the fourth quarter of2008.
Based on the pilot results, Idaho Power plans to expand the pilot into a full-scale program,
titled Weatherization Solutions for Eligible Customers, offered in the Twin Falls area in 2009.
· A new Attic Insulation Pilot was launched in 2008. This successful pilot wil expand to a full-scale
program in 2009 under the name Home Improvement.
· A new ENERGY STAR\I Appliance Program began in 2008 and wil continue into 2009 under
the name Home Products Program.
· The AlC Cool Credit program expanded into the new servìce areas of Payette and Twin Falls.
Additionally in 2008, Idaho Power applied this program to the housing at Mountain Home Air Force
Base.
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 73
Enhanced Commitment Idaho Power Company
.The Easy Upgrades program sponsored a special summer lighting product promotion.
.Easy Upgrades concluded a special offer ofVendingMiser™ units that ran from November 2007
through October 2008, with more than 3,600 units installed.
.In 2008, Idaho Power filed with the IPUC to expand the Irgation Peak Rewards program to provide
a dispatchable demand response option.
.The Custom Efficiency program was modified to increase the minimum project size from
20,000 kWh to 100,000 kWh in order to allow resources to be focused on larger projects.
.For Oregon customers, Idaho Power filed three new programs and modified three more. The new
programs are AlC Cool Credit, Home Products Program, and Heating & Cooling Efficiency
Program. The programs modified are Change a Light Program, Easy Upgrades, and Manufactured
Housing Energy Efficiency Program.
Bui ing im
Through Idaho Power's funding of the NEEA and codes-related efforts, Idaho Power has assisted in
increasing energy efficiency requirements in Idaho's building codes, including the adoption of a new
commercial and residential code (2006 IECC) effective January 1,2008. Idaho Power has two key roles
once the codes are adopted: 1) informing the design community of code changes and 2) modifying Idaho
Power energy efficiency programs to reflect the new codes. In 2008, Idaho Power modified the Building
Efficiency program to reflect the adoption of the new 2006 IECC. Furhermore, the new residential code
in 2008 resulted in code coming closer to the requirements in the ENERGY STAR Homes Northwest
Builder Option Package, which directly led to a decrease in the Idaho Power ENERGY STAR Homes
Northwest program incentive amount.
rsu Appliance
Idaho Power contracted with Quantec, LLC, to conduct a study of potential savings and costs associated
with enacting appliance efficiency standards in Idaho similar to those recently enacted in Oregon.
The final report, Idaho Power Appliance Standards Assessment, was completed January 9, 2008.
The 2009 IRP wil include an evaluation of the findings from this study.
ued
Beyond Peak..Shavi
of DSM Programs
ifting Programs
Idaho Power has focused additional resources toward energy efficiency education, marketing, and
promotion. Increased customer awareness of energy-saving ideas was accomplished via distrbution of
over 8,000 copies of the 96-page book 30 Simple Things You Can Do To Save Energy. The five-class
Fall Energy Efficiency & Green Living Series were held for a second year at the Boise Public Library,
with 147 participants attending in 2008. Incremental educational programs for 2008 included weekly
energy efficiency messages on The HomeFix Show with Joe Prin on 580 KIDO AM radio, provision of
energy efficient gift purchase tips durng the holidays, sponsorship of the Energy Conservation and
Recycling track at the first annual Idaho Green Expo, and development of a new presentation for
fourh- and sixth-grade students titled "Simple Ways to Save Energy."
Page 74 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Enhanced Commitment
For industrial and commercial customers, Idaho Power continues to promote the offerings of the IEA
through NEEA to food processing customers. In 2008, there were six facilities in the Idaho Power
service area committed to implementing Continuous Energy Improvement practices at their facilities.
In 2008, there were nine offered classes covering motors, pump systems, compressed air, and ammonia
refrigeration. This technical training is a key element of customer education, which helps drve energy
efficiency projects at customer facilities. Idaho Power strengthened the working relationship with the
Boise chapter of the Building Owners and Managers Association (BOMA). Also, Idaho Power worked
closely with Bonnevile Power and other utilities on research into the effectiveness of replacing
damaged door gaskets in refrigerated walk-ins and reach-in display cases. In 2008, Idaho Power became
a member of the Utility IT Energy Efficiency Coalition, which is charged with supporting development
of energy efficient instrctional technology and data center operations. Idaho Power also became an
associate member of the Climate Savers Computing Initiative.
In 2008, Idaho Power continued to increase energy effciency awareness among its customers through a
variety of media outlets. Idaho Power distrbuted energy effciency information via 28 Update articles,
22 News Scans articles, 5 E-News videos, 15 articles in Consumer Connection, 10 bill inserts, 13 radio
interviews, 1 television article, and 2 press releases. In March, Idaho Power celebrated its first
company-wide Energy Efficiency Month for employees, encouraging their participation in programs.
ird..Party on
Idaho Power uses third-party consultants to verify that program specifications are met, to verify the
amount of energy savings achieved, and to obtain data on energy effciency, demand response measures,
and programs.
Idaho Power provides funding and participation in the RTF. The RTF is an advisory committee that was
established in 1999 to develop standards for verifying and evaluating savings from energy efficiency
programs and measures. Idaho Power uses the RTF as a source for information on programs and
measures, and uses the RTF databases to provide deemed savings for some energy effciency measures.
In 2008, Idaho Power contracted with Nexant, Inc., to assess the market potential for DSM activities in
Idaho Power's service area. For this study, Nexant developed spreadsheet models estimating DSM
potential as economic conditions and end-use measure assumptions change. Nexant wil provide a final
document in 2009. The information provided by the potential study wil be included in the. 2009 IRP.
In spring 2008, Idaho Power contracted with Ecotope, Inc., to provide energy savings estimates for the
Attic Insulation Pilot. At the conclusion of the pilot, Idaho Power sought Ecotope's expertise to update
the estimated energy savings impacts of the program based on revised assumptions from the pilot.
With these updated energy-savings estimates, the cost-effective program wil continue under the name
Home Improvement Program.
Idaho Power contracted with the Boise Integrated Design Laboratory (IDL) to provide evaluation
fuctions, including measurement and verification. Under this contract, an evaluation has been initiated
on certain measures in the Building Efficiency program. Idaho Power expects to work closely with IDL
to study other commercial sector programs in the future.
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 75
Enhanced Commitment Idaho Power Company
In the commercial sector, Idaho Power participated in the NEEA Commercial Building Stock
Assessment (CBSA), updating the original study from 2003, which is used for identifying and verifying
commercial building stock characteristics in the Pacific Northwest. Idaho Power contracted with the
Cadmus Group for this study, requesting an over-sample ofIdaho Power's service area to obtain a
statistically valid building sample for program planning purposes.
Since 2005, the AlC Cool Credit program contracted with a third-party installation contractor,
Honeywell, Inc., for installation of radio-pager controlled switches on participants' AlC units. To ensure
customer satisfaction, this contractor performs quality-assurance inspections on installations and makes
follow-up phone calls to recent switch recipients. Honeywell submits weekly reports to Idaho Power
program staff on inspections, follow-ups, and results.
Idaho Power participated with NEEA throughout 2008 to evaluate the impacts of the ENERGY STAR
Homes Northwest program. Results of this study wil be finalized in 2009. The ENERGY STAR Homes
program regularly uses certified Home Performance Specialists for third-party verification, ensuring that
each ENERGY STAR qualified home is built to ENERGY STAR standards. The Idaho Office of Energy
Resources then certifies each of these homes as an ENERGY STAR home.
The Energy House Calls program contracts with third-party experts to perform quality assurance on 5%
of homes serviced by the program. These contractors visit the site within approximately one month of
the energy house call and verify that the energy effciency measures were performed to program
specifications.
The Heating & Cooling Efficiency Program has a third-party quality assurance contractor.
Honeywell, Inc., performs on-site verifications on approximately 5-7% of completed jobs.
of Energy th h lectricity Rate Design
In June, Idaho Power fied the 2008 General Rate Case with proposals for significant changes in rate
design for most customer classes. These rate-change proposals were driven by the explicit Idaho Power
objective of providing customers with cost-based price signals, which encourage the wise and efficient
use of energy. Rate design proposals for the residential and small commercial customers included
inclining block rates for both summer and non-summer seasons. These block rates encourage customers
to use fewer kWh each month and thereby save a larger increment on their electricity bils than if they
did not have block rates. Rate design proposals for the larger commercial and industrial customers
included time-of-use rates, which encourage customers to reduce or shift electricity usage from peak
times ofthe day. The rate design proposal for the irrgation customer centered around encouraging
energy efficiency through load-factor pricing.
Power's I Energy Efficiency Commitment
Idaho Power's continued commitment toward promoting energy efficiency extends beyond encouraging,
incenting, and educating its customers. In 2008, Idaho Power constructed a new operations facility in
Lake Fork, Idaho. Almost 99% complete as of December 2008, it is the first facility built by Idaho
Power to use an integrated approach to maximize expertise and coordination throughout the process.
Many companies, including Idaho Power, are concentrating their efforts towards LEED certification.
Page 76 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Enhanced Commitment
The Long Valley Operations Center is certain to qualify for Silver LEED certification, and wil most
likely have enough points for the Gold leveL.
In 2008, Idaho Power successfully retrofitted the entire fifth floor of the Corporate Headquarters (CHQ).
Included in this retrofit was the use of low volatile organic compounds (VOC) paint, recycled carpet tile,
and low VOC glue to adhere them. The new window shading and the use of T5 lighting and ballasts are
projected to save approximately 40% ofthe energy expended by the old lighting packages. Additionally,
shorter, 53" wall panels are used for cubical partitions, allowing more daylight and reducing lighting
costs. The plan is to use the fifth floor as the standard for office space in the CHQ and other offce areas
as budget dollars are approved. Lighting and HV AC upgrades were also made at the Mini-Cassia
Operations Center.
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 77
Enhanced Commitment Idaho Power Company
This page left blank intentionally.
Page 78 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Appendices
Ap DICES
This report includes four appendices. Appendix 1 contains financial information for 2008, showing the
beginning balance, ending balance, and the expenditues for the Idaho Energy Efficiency Rider,
the Oregon Energy Effciency Rider, BP A funding, and NEEA payments and credits. Appendix 2 also
contains financial information. This second appendix shows expenses by funding source for each of
Idaho Power's energy effciency programs or activities. Appendix 3 shows participation, utility cost,
total resource cost, energy and demand savings, measure life, and levelized costs for Idaho Power's
current energy efficiency programs and activities for 2008. Appendix 4 shows similar data as Appendix
3, but also includes data for past years' program performance, benefit-cost ratios from the utility
perspective, and from the total resource cost perspectives for active programs.
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 79
Appendices-Appendix 1 Idaho Power Company
Appendix 1. Idaho Rider, Oregon Rider, BPA, and NEEA Funding Balances
2008 Beginning Balance. .... ..... ... ...... ....... .............. ... ...... ....... .............. ....... .......... ... ........... $
2008 Funding plus Accrued Interest.. ........ .......... ...... .... ....... ..................... ............... .... ....
Total 2008 Funds
2008 Expenses...................................................................................................................
2008 Year-End Balance $
1,483,074.58
13,454,883.09
14,937,957.67
(1
(3,942,318.06)
2008 Beginning Balance..................................................................................................... $
2008 Funding plus Accrued Interest.. ......... .................... ....... ............ ....................... ..........
Total 2008 Funds
2008 Expenses...................................................................................................................
2008 Year-End Balance $
410,225.46
411,602.13
821,827.59
196,827.28
Total Funding and Accrued Interest October 2001-December 2007................................. $
2008 Accrued Interest.........................................................................................................
Total Funds May 2002-December 2008
Total Expenses-Inception through December 2007.........................................................
2008 Expenses...................................................................................................................
Total BPA Funded Expenses
2008 Year-End Balance (a) $
3,156,889.59
2,152.12
3,159,041.71
42,248.32
2008 IPC Contractual Obligation......................................................................................... $
Credit Applied to 2008 Contractual Obligation..............................................................
Interest Credit Applied to 2008 Contract Obligation (b)................................................
Interest Credit Applied to 2009 Contract Obligation (c).................................................
Total 2008 Cash Payments by IPC
Credit Balance
Beginning Balance Funds Held by NEEA.....................................................................
2005-2007 Credit Applied to Contract Obligation........ ...... .................. ... .......... .... .........
2008 Credit Applied to Contract Obligation...................................................................
2008 Year-End Credit Balance $
a The 2008 balance of SPA funds was committed to two Solar 4R Schools projects prior to the suspension of SPA funding
in 2007. These projects were scheduled for completion in 2008 but have been delayed to 2009.
1,300,000.00
(5,061.00)
942,014.00
15,1
1,463,970.00
325,588.00
(b) The first quarter invoice for the Idaho Power 2008 contractual obligation to NEEA was processed in December 2007 with the
amount scheduled to be amortized over the first quarter. Interest credit of $14,781 was immediately recognized in 2007.
(e) The first quarter invoice for the Idaho Power 2009 contractual obligation to NEEA was processed in December 2008 with the
amount scheduled to be amortized over the first quarter. Interest credit of $5,061 was immediately recognized in 2008.
Page 80 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Appendices-Appendix 2
Appendix 2.2008 DSM Expenses by Funding Source (Dollars)
Rider
Sector/Program Idaho Oregon BPA IPC Total Program
Energy Efficiency/Demand Response
Residential
AlC Cool Credit ......... .... ....... .............. .......... ........... ....$2,922,985 $45,404 $0 $988 $2,969,317
Attic Insulation Pilot.... ....... ....... ....... ................. ........ ...123,454 0 0 0 $123,454
Energy Efficient Lighting..............................................1,011,850 6,242 0 200 $1,018,292
Energy House Calls... ....... ........ ............. .................. ...448,992 35,388 0 0 $484,379
ENERGY STAR" Homes Northwest ...............................294,579 6,388 0 1,094 $302,061
Heating & Cooling Efficiency Program........................466,094 6,959 0 498 $473,551
Home Products Program.............................................245,219 5,541 0 100 $250,860
Home Weatherization Pilot..........................................51,670 0 0 1,138 $52,807
Oregon Residential Weatherization.............................0 1,908 0 5,509 $7,417
Rebate Advantage.......................................................79,547 11,341 0 0 $90,888
Weatherization Assistance for Qualified Customers...0 0 0 1,419,475 $1,419,475
Com mercial/lndustrial
Building Effciency ...... ................................................1,006,025 47,550 0 1,434 $1,055,009
Easy Upgrades......... ........ .............. ....... ................ ......2,922,340 52,556 0 17,364 $2,992,261
Holiday Lighting Program............................................28,782 0 0 0 $28,782
Oregon Commercial Audit...........................................0 0 0 58 $58
Custom Efficiency......... ................................. ..............3,948,617 86,858 0 10,196 $4,045,671
Irrigation
Irrigation Efficiency Rewards.......................................1,878,960 193,276 0 31,466 $2,103,702
Irrigation Peak Rewards .............................................1,373,855 17,570 0 40,415 $1,431,840
Energy Efficiency Total 16,802,969 516,981 0 1,529,934 $18,849,884
Market Transformation
Northwest Energy Efficiency Allance..........................894,913 47,101 0 0 $942,014
Market Transformation Total 894,913 47,101 0 0 $942,014
Other Programs and Activities
Residential
Residential Education Initiative....................................142,969 7,818 0 130 $150,917
Commercial
Commercial Education Initiative ..... .............. ..............69,059 3,632 0 46 $72,738
Other
CRC Renewables.. ......................................................0 0 6,950 0 $6,950
Distribution Efficiency Initiative!a). . . . . ...............................0 0 0 -1,913 $-1,913
DSM Direct Program Overhead..................................135,788 6,945 0 27,178 $169,911
Local Energy Efficiency Funds. ........... ........................22,714 0 0 0 $22,714
Other Programs and Activities Total 370,530 18,396 6,950 25,441 $421,317
Indirect Program Expenses
DSM Accounting and Analysis.. .............. ....................792,478 41,483 0 123,942 $957,904
Energy Efficiency Advisory Group...............................2,148 63 0 0 $2,211
Special Accounting Entries...................... ....................17,236 977 0 1,977 $20,191
Indirect Program Expenses Total 811,863 42,523 0 125,919 $980,305
Totals $18,880,276 $625,000 $6,950 $1,681,294 $21,193,520
(ai 2007 Expenses reversed in 2008.
Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008 Page 81
i:Q)
co (1 00N
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

3
.

2
0
0
8

D
S
M

P
r
o
g
r
a
m

A
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
Sa
v
i
n
g
s
No
m
i
n
a
l

L
e
v
e
l
i
z
e
d
Co
s
t
s
(
a
)
To
t
a
l

C
o
s
t
s
Al
C

C
o
o
l

C
r
e
d
i
t

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
20
,
1
9
5
ho
m
e
s
$2
,
9
6
9
,
3
7
7
$2
,
6
1
6
,
0
7
2
nl
a
22
.
6
0
nl
a
nl
a
nl
a
Ir
r
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

P
e
a
k

R
e
w
a
r
d
s
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
89
7
se
r
v
i
c
e

p
o
i
n
t
s
$1
,
4
3
1
,
8
4
0
$1
8
9
,
4
9
2
nl
a
35
.
1
0
nl
a
nl
a
nl
a
To
t
a
l
$4
,
4
0
1
,
2
1
7
$2
,
8
0
5
,
5
6
3
n/
a
57
.
7
0
:
'

.
,
,
'

.
~
J
!
I

"

'
.
.
,

,
.
.
J
.

.
A
,
A
i
l
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
At
t
c

I
n
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n

P
i
l
o
t
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
28
2
ho
m
e
s
$1
2
3
,
4
5
4
$1
5
7
,
8
6
6
31
7
,
8
1
4
0.
0
3
25
$0
.
0
2
9
$0
.
0
3
7
En
e
r
g
y

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
t

l
i
g
h
t
i
n
g
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
43
6
,
2
3
4
CF
L

b
u
l
b
s
$1
,
0
1
8
,
2
9
2
$7
9
3
,
2
6
5
14
,
3
0
9
,
4
4
4
7
$0
.
0
1
1
$0
.
0
0
9
En
e
r
g
y

H
o
u
s
e

C
a
l
l
s
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1,
0
9
9
ho
m
e
s
$4
8
4
,
3
7
9
$4
8
4
,
3
7
9
88
3
,
0
3
8
20
$0
.
0
4
5
$0
.
0
4
5
EN
E
R
G
Y

S
T

A
R
~

H
o
m
e
s
25
4
ho
m
e
s
$3
0
2
,
0
6
1
$3
7
5
,
0
0
7
46
8
,
9
5
8
0.
6
1
25
$0
.
0
4
8
$0
.
0
5
9
No
r
t
h
w
e
s
t
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
He
a
t
i
n
g

&

C
o
o
l
i
n
g

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y
35
9
ho
m
e
s
$4
7
3
,
5
5
1
$5
9
9
,
7
7
1
56
1
,
4
4
1
18
$0
.
0
7
3
$0
.
0
9
2
0
Pr
o
g
r
a
m

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
(1
Ho
m
e

P
r
o
d
u
c
t
s

P
r
o
g
r
a
m

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
3,
0
3
4
ap
p
l
i
a
n
c
e
s
l
f
i
x
t
u
r
e
s
$2
5
0
,
8
6
0
$4
6
8
,
0
5
6
54
1
,
6
1
5
15
$0
.
0
4
4
$0
.
0
8
2
3 Q)
Ho
m
e

W
e
a
t
h
e
r
i
z
a
t
i
o
n

P
i
l
o
t
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
16
ho
m
e
s
$5
2
,
8
0
7
$4
8
,
1
6
2
71
,
6
8
0
25
$0
.
0
5
5
$0
.
0
5
0
::c.
Or
e
g
o
n

R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l

W
e
a
t
h
e
r
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
3
ho
m
e
s
$7
,
4
1
7
$2
8
,
7
5
2
22
,
1
9
6
25
$0
.
0
2
5
$0
.
0
9
6
i(fa:
Re
b
a
t
e

A
d
v
a
n
t
a
g
e
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
10
7
ho
m
e
s
$9
0
,
8
8
8
$1
7
9
,
8
6
8
46
3
,
4
0
1
45
$0
.
0
1
2
$0
.
0
2
5
(1 š:
We
a
t
h
e
r
i
z
a
t
i
o
n

A
s
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e

f
o
r
43
9
ho
m
e
s
/
n
o
n
-
p
r
o
f
i
t
s
$1
,
3
7
5
,
6
3
2
$1
,
7
5
5
,
7
4
9
4,
0
6
4
,
3
0
1
25
$0
.
0
2
5
$0
.
0
3
2
Q)
Qu
a
l
i
f
i
e
d

C
u
s
t
o
m
e
r
s
-
I
d
a
h
o
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
::
We
a
t
h
e
r
i
z
a
t
i
o
n

A
s
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e

f
o
r
Q)
13
ho
m
e
s
/
n
o
n
-
p
r
o
f
i
t
s
$4
3
,
8
4
3
$7
4
,
0
4
8
73
,
8
4
1
25
$0
.
0
4
0
$0
.
0
6
8
CO
Qu
a
l
i
f
i
e
d
(13
Se
c
t
o
r

T
o
t
a
l
$4
,
2
2
3
,
1
8
5
$4
,
9
6
4
,
9
2
4
21
,
7
7
7
,
7
2
9
0.
6
4
(1::
a.

L
e
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

C
o
s
t
s

a
r
e

b
a
s
e
d

o
n

f
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l

i
n
p
u
t
s

f
r
o
m

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
'
s

2
0
0
6

I
n
t
e
g
r
a
t
e
d

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e

P
l
a
n

a
n
d

c
a
l
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s

i
n
c
l
u
d
e

l
i
n
e

l
o
s
s

a
d
j
u
s
t
e
d

e
n
e
r
g
y

s
a
v
i
n
g
s
.
-~
b.

T
h
e

T
o
t
a
l

U
t
i
l
t
y

C
o
s
t

i
s

a
l
l

c
o
s
t
s

i
n
c
u
r
r
e
d

b
y

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

t
o

i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t

a
n
d

m
a
n
a
g
e

a

D
S
M

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
.
::
c.

T
h
e

T
o
t
a
l

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e

C
o
s
t

i
s

t
h
e

t
o
t
a
l

e
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s

f
o
r

a

D
S
M

p
r
o
g
r
a
m

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
o
i
n
t

o
f

v
i
e
w

o
f

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

a
n
d

i
t
s

c
u
s
t
o
m
e
r
s

a
s

a

w
h
o
l
e
.
::c
d.

S
u
m
m
e
r

P
e
a
k

D
e
m
a
n
d

i
s

r
e
p
o
r
t
e
d

w
h
e
r
e

p
r
o
g
r
a
m

M
W

r
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n

i
s

d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
e
d
.
~::
(1
'00;:N0000
~'0'0 (1::c.8"¡'0'0(1::c.x'w c.Q)::oi:~-,()o3'0 Q)::
'o
0
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

3
.

2
0
0
8

D
S
M

P
r
o
g
r
a
m

A
c
t
i
v
i
t
y

(
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
)
a.
CD
Q)
3
::
Q)
0
::
No
m
i
n
a
l

L
e
v
e
l
i
z
e
d
"'
a.
To
t
a
l

C
o
s
t
s
Sa
v
i
n
g
s
Co
s
t
s
(
a
)
0
i(f
:E
e:
Su
m
m
e
r
CD..
CD
An
n
u
a
l
Pe
a
k
Me
a
s
u
r
e
To
t
a
l
()
s:
Pa
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
n
t
s
Ut
i
l
t
y
b
)
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
(
c
)
En
e
r
H
¥
De
m
a
n
d
(
d
)
Li
f
e
Ut
i
l
t
y
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
0
Q)
3
::
Pr
o
H
r
a
m
(N
u
m
b
e
r
)
(U
n
i
t
s
)
(D
o
l
l
a
r
s
)
(D
o
l
l
a
r
s
)
(k
W
h
)
(M
W
)
(Y
e
a
r
s
)
($
/
k
W
h
)
($
/
k
W
h
)
'0
Q)
Q)
CO
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
::
CD
"0
3
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
y
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
60
pr
o
j
e
c
t
s
$1
,
0
5
5
,
0
0
9
$1
,
6
7
3
,
2
6
8
6,
5
9
8
,
1
2
3
0.
9
6
12
$0
.
0
1
7
$0
.
0
2
8
CD::
Ea
s
y

U
p
g
r
a
d
e
s
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
68
5
pr
o
j
e
c
t
s
$2
,
9
9
2
,
2
6
1
$1
0
,
0
9
6
,
6
2
7
25
,
9
2
8
,
3
9
1
4.
4
9
12
$0
.
0
1
3
$0
.
0
4
3
-~::
Ho
l
i
d
a
y

L
i
g
h
t
i
n
g

P
r
o
g
r
a
m
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
14
pr
o
j
e
c
t
s
$2
8
,
7
8
2
$7
3
,
1
0
8
25
9
,
0
9
2
10
$0
.
0
1
4
$0
.
0
3
5
::c
Or
e
g
o
n

C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l

A
u
d
i
t
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
0
au
d
i
t
s
$5
8
$5
8
nl
a
nl
a
nl
a
Q)::
Se
c
t
o
r

T
o
t
a
l
$4
,
0
7
6
,
1
0
9
$1
1
,
8
4
3
,
0
6
1
32
,
7
8
5
,
6
0
6
5.
4
5
CD
'0
In
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
0;:
Cu
s
t
o
m

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
10
1
pr
o
j
e
c
t
s
$4
,
0
4
5
,
6
7
1
$1
6
,
3
1
2
,
3
7
9
41
,
0
5
8
,
6
3
9
4.
7
7
12
$0
.
0
1
1
$0
.
0
4
4
'"0
$4
,
0
4
5
,
6
7
1
$1
6
,
3
1
2
,
3
7
9
0
Se
c
t
o
r

T
o
t
a
l
41
,
0
5
8
,
6
3
9
4.
7
7
0)
Ir
r
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
Ir
r
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y

R
e
w
a
r
d
s

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
96
1
pr
o
j
e
c
t
s
$2
,
1
0
3
,
7
0
2
$5
,
8
5
0
,
7
7
8
11
,
7
4
6
,
3
9
5
3.
4
7
8
$0
.
0
2
6
$0
.
0
7
3
Se
c
t
o
r

T
o
t
a
l
$2
,
1
0
3
,
7
0
2
$5
,
8
5
0
,
7
7
8
11
,
7
4
6
,
3
9
5
3.
4
7
$9
4
2
,
0
1
4
$9
4
2
,
0
1
4
32
,
6
7
1
,
4
6
5
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l

E
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n

I
n
i
t
a
t
i
v
e
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
$1
5
0
,
9
1
7
$1
5
0
,
9
1
7
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l

E
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n

I
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
.
.
.
.
.
.
$7
2
,
7
3
8
$7
2
,
7
3
8
a.

L
e
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

C
o
s
t
s

a
r
e

b
a
s
e
d

o
n

f
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l

i
n
p
u
t
s

f
r
o
m

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
'
s

2
0
0
6

I
n
t
e
g
r
a
t
e
d

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e

P
l
a
n

a
n
d

c
a
l
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s

i
n
c
l
u
d
e

l
i
n
e

l
o
s
s

a
d
j
u
s
t
e
d

e
n
e
r
g
y

s
a
v
i
n
g
s
.
b.

T
h
e

T
o
t
a
l

U
t
i
l
t
y

C
o
s
t

i
s

a
l
l

c
o
s
t
s

i
n
c
u
r
r
e
d

b
y

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

t
o

i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t

a
n
d

m
a
n
a
g
e

a

D
S
M

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
.
c.

T
h
e

T
o
t
a
l

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e

C
o
s
t

i
s

t
h
e

t
o
t
a
l

e
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s

f
o
r

a

D
S
M

p
r
o
g
r
a
m

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
o
i
n
t

o
f

v
i
e
w

o
f

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

a
n
d

i
t
s

c
u
s
t
o
m
e
r
s

a
s

a

w
h
o
l
e
.
d.

S
u
m
m
e
r

P
e
a
k

D
e
m
a
n
d

i
s

r
e
p
o
r
t
e
d

w
h
e
r
e

p
r
o
g
r
a
m

M
W

r
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n

i
s

d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
e
d
.
1.

S
a
v
i
n
g
s

a
r
e

p
r
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
r
y

e
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
s

p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d

b
y

t
h
e

N
E
E
A
.
"'Q)
CO CD 0)W
~'0'0 CD::a.~.Ull'0'0 CD::a.x'w
-0II CO CD ~o CD3II:i0-iene:
CD 15II:iIIco CD3 CD:i-~:i:ii:~::CD"0o::I\oo(X
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

3
.

2
0
0
8

D
S
M

P
r
o
g
r
a
m

A
c
t
i
v
i
t
y

(
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
)
To
t
a
l

C
o
s
t
s
Sa
v
i
n
g
s
No
m
i
n
a
l

L
e
v
e
l
i
z
e
d
Co
s
t
s
l
O
)
Su
m
m
e
r
An
n
u
a
l

P
e
a
k

M
e
a
s
u
r
e
Pa
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
n
t
s

U
t
i
l
i
t
t
b
)

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e
l
c
)

E
n
e
r
g
y

D
e
m
a
n
d
l
d
)

L
i
f
e

U
t
i
l
t
y
To
t
a
l
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
Ot
h
e
r
CR
C

R
e
n
e
w
a
b
l
e
s
Di
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
y

I
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e

(
2
)
.
.
.
.
DS
M

D
i
r
e
c
t

P
r
o
g
r
a
m

O
v
e
r
h
e
a
d
.
.
.
.
.
.
Lo
c
a
l

E
n
e
r
g
y

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
y

F
u
n
d
s
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
To
t
a
l

P
r
o
g
r
a
m

D
i
r
e
c
t

E
x
p
e
n
s
e
In
d
i
r
e
c
t

P
r
o
g
r
a
m

E
x
p
e
n
s
e
To
t
a
l

D
S
M

E
x
p
e
n
s
e
$6
,
9
5
0
-$
1
,
9
1
3
$1
6
9
,
9
1
1
$2
2
,
7
1
4
$2
0
,
2
1
3
,
2
1
5
$9
8
0
,
3
0
5
$2
1
,
1
9
3
,
5
2
0
2
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
$6
,
9
5
0
-$
1
,
9
1
3
$1
6
9
,
9
1
1
$6
0
,
1
0
0

1
1
5
,
9
3
1
$4
3
,
1
7
7
,
4
2
3

1
4
0
,
1
5
5
,
7
6
5
$0
.
0
1
9
$0
.
0
4
9
15
72
.
0
3
a.

L
e
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

C
o
s
t
s

a
r
e

b
a
s
e
d

o
n

f
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l

i
n
p
u
t
s

f
r
o
m

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
'
s

2
0
0
6

I
n
t
e
g
r
a
t
e
d

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e

P
l
a
n

a
n
d

c
a
l
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s

i
n
c
l
u
d
e

l
i
n
e

l
o
s
s

a
d
j
u
s
t
e
d

e
n
e
r
g
y

s
a
v
i
n
g
s
.
b.

T
h
e

T
o
t
a
l

U
t
i
l
t
y

C
o
s
t

i
s

a
l
l

c
o
s
t
s

i
n
c
u
r
r
e
d

b
y

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

t
o

i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t

a
n
d

m
a
n
a
g
e

a

D
S
M

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
.
c.

T
h
e

T
o
t
a
l

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e

C
o
s
t

i
s

t
h
e

t
o
t
a
l

e
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s

f
o
r

a

D
S
M

p
r
o
g
r
a
m

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
o
i
n
t

o
f

v
i
e
w

o
f

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

a
n
d

i
t
s

c
u
s
t
o
m
e
r
s

a
s

a

w
h
o
l
e
.
d.

S
u
m
m
e
r

P
e
a
k

D
e
m
a
n
d

i
s

r
e
p
o
r
t
e
d

w
h
e
r
e

p
r
o
g
r
a
m

M
W

r
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n

i
s

d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
e
d
.
2.

2
0
0
7

e
x
p
e
n
s
e
s

r
e
v
e
r
s
e
d

i
n

2
0
0
8
.
~"0 -g:i0-g"L"0"0 CD:i0-x'W a:
II::o -0 ~..()o3"0II:i
'-
0
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

4
.

D
S
M

E
x
p
e
n
s
e

a
n
d

P
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e

2
0
0
2
-
2
0
0
8
a.
CD
Q)
3
::
Q)
0
:J
""
a.
Pr
o
g
r
a
m

L
i
f
e

B
e
n
e
f
i
t
/
C
o
s
t
0
i
Le
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

C
o
s
t
s
l
a
)
Ra
t
i
o
s
l
b
)
en
To
t
a
l

C
o
s
t
s
Sa
v
i
n
g
s

a
n
d

D
e
m
a
n
d

R
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
~
e:
To
t
a
l
CD
CD
..
Ut
i
l
i
t
y
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
("
s:
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
An
n
u
a
l
Av
e
r
a
g
e
Pe
a
k
Me
a
s
u
r
e
To
t
a
l
To
t
a
l
Be
n
e
f
i
t
/
C
o
s
t
Be
n
e
f
i
t
/
C
o
s
t
0
Q)
Pa
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
n
t
s
Ut
i
l
i
t
y

C
o
s
t
l
e
)
Co
s
t
1
d
l
En
e
r
g
y
De
m
a
n
d
1
e
)
De
m
a
n
d
1
n
Li
f
e
Ut
i
l
i
t
y
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
Ra
t
i
o
Ra
t
i
o
3
:J Q)
""
CO
Pr
o
g
l
'
m
f
Y
e
a
r
(N
u
m
b
e
r
)
(d
o
H
a
t
'
)
(d
o
H
a
r
s
)
(k
l
N
)
(a
M
W
)
(M
W
)
(Y
e
a
r
s
)
($
/
k
W
h
)
($
/
k
W
h
)
Q)
CD
:J
3
..
.
.
'c
CD
Al
C

C
o
o
l

C
r
e
d
i
t
:J-
$2
7
5
,
6
4
5
~
20
0
3
20
4
$2
6
9
,
6
8
0
0.
0
0
:J
20
0
4
42
0
$2
8
7
,
2
5
3
$2
7
4
,
6
8
6
0.
4
0
:JC
20
0
5
2,
3
6
9
$7
5
4
,
0
6
2
$7
1
7
,
9
0
2
2.
7
0
~::
20
0
6
5,
3
6
9
$1
,
2
3
5
,
4
7
6
$1
,
1
3
1
,
4
3
9
5.
6
0
CD
20
0
7
13
,
6
9
2
$2
,
4
2
6
,
1
5
4
$2
,
1
9
9
,
4
8
6
10
.
8
0
""0
20
0
8
20
,
1
9
5
$2
,
9
6
9
,
3
7
7
$2
,
6
1
6
,
0
7
2
22
.
6
0
;:
'"
To
t
a
l
$7
,
9
4
7
,
9
6
6
$7
,
2
0
9
,
2
6
6
1.
3
8
1.
3
8
00
Ir
r
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

P
e
a
k

R
e
w
a
r
d
s
CX
20
0
4
58
$3
4
4
,
7
1
4
$1
8
5
,
0
0
6
5.
6
0
(n
20
0
5
89
4
$1
,
4
6
8
,
2
8
2
$4
7
9
,
4
8
4
40
.
3
0
(2
)
20
0
6
90
6
$1
,
3
2
4
,
4
1
8
$2
3
9
,
9
7
7
31
.
8
0
(3
)
20
0
7
94
7
$1
,
6
1
5
,
8
8
1
$2
3
9
,
8
5
5
37
.
4
0
(3
)
20
0
8
89
7
$1
,
4
3
1
,
8
4
0
$1
8
9
,
4
9
2
35
.
1
0
(3
)
To
t
a
l
$6
,
1
8
5
,
1
3
5
$1
,
3
3
3
,
8
1
4
1.
1
5
1.
1
5
At
t
i
c

I
n
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n

P
i
l
o
t
20
0
8
28
2
$1
2
3
,
4
5
4
$1
5
7
,
8
6
6
31
7
,
8
1
4
0.
0
4
0.
0
3
25
$0
.
0
2
9
$0
.
0
3
7
To
t
a
l
28
2
$1
2
3
,
4
5
4
$1
5
7
,
8
6
6
31
7
,
8
1
4
25
$0
.
0
2
9
$0
.
0
3
7
2.
4
8
1.
9
4
En
e
r
g
y

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
y

P
a
c
k
e
t
s
20
0
2
2,
9
2
5
$7
5
5
$7
5
5
15
5
,
7
5
7
0.
0
2
7
$0
.
0
0
1
$0
.
0
0
1
(4
)
~
To
t
a
l
2,
9
2
5
$7
5
5
$7
5
5
15
5
,
7
5
7
$0
.
0
0
1
$0
.
0
0
1
""
7
""CD
(a
)

L
e
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

C
o
s
t
s

a
r
e

b
a
s
e
d

o
n

f
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l

i
n
p
u
t
s

f
r
o
m

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
r
'
s

2
0
0
6

I
n
t
e
g
r
a
t
e
d

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e

P
l
a
n

a
n
d

c
a
l
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s

i
n
c
l
u
d
e

l
i
n
e

l
o
s
s

a
d
j
u
s
t
e
d

e
n
e
r
g
y

s
a
v
i
n
g
s
.
:Ja.
(b
)

P
r
o
g
r
a
m

L
i
f
e

B
e
n
e
f
r
t
f
C
o
s
t

R
a
t
i
o
s

a
r
e

p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d

f
o
r

a
c
t
i
v
e
,

n
o
n
-
s
t
a
t
u
t
o
r
y

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s

o
n
l
y
.
õ'
CD
(c
)

T
h
e

T
o
t
a
l

U
t
i
l
i
t
y

C
o
s
t

i
s

a
l
l

c
o
s
t
s

i
n
c
u
r
r
e
d

b
y

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

t
o

i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t

a
n
d

m
a
n
a
g
e

a

D
S
M

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
.
CI
(d
)

T
h
e

T
o
t
a
l

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e

C
o
s
t

i
s

t
h
e

t
o
t
a
l

e
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s

f
o
r

a

D
S
M

p
r
o
g
r
a
m

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
o
i
n
t

o
f

vie
w

o
f

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

a
n
d

i
t
s

c
u
s
t
o
m
e
r
s

a
s

a

w
t
o
l
e
.
l
(e
)

A
v
e
r
a
g
e

D
e
m
a
n
d

=

A
n
n
u
a
l

E
n
e
r
g
y

/
8
,
7
6
0

a
n
n
u
a
l

h
o
u
r
s
.
""
""
""
Q)
(f
)

S
u
m
m
e
r

P
e
a
k

D
e
m
a
n
d

i
s

r
e
p
o
r
t
e
d

f
o
r

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s

t
h
a
t

d
i
r
e
c
t
l
y

r
e
d
u
c
e

l
o
a
d

o
r

m
e
a
s
u
r
e

d
e
m
a
n
d

r
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
s

d
u
r
i
n
g

s
u
m
m
e
r

p
e
a
k

s
e
a
s
o
n
.
CD
CO
:J
CD
(1
)

U
t
i
l
i
t
y

c
o
s
t
.
r
e
s
t
a
t
e
d

f
r
o
m

$
3
2
0
,
3
0
9

i
n

p
r
i
o
r

h
i
s
t
o
r
i
c
a
l

r
e
p
o
r
t
i
n
g

t
o

r
e
f
l
e
c
t

a
l
l

f
u
n
d
i
n
g

s
o
u
r
c
e
s
.
a.
CX
X'
oi
(2
)

P
e
a
k

M
W

a
c
h
i
e
v
e
d

b
a
s
e
d

o
n

m
i
d
-
w
e
e
k

l
o
a
d

r
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n

s
c
h
e
d
u
l
e
.
.t
(3
)

P
e
a
k

M
W

a
c
h
i
e
v
e
d

b
a
s
e
d

o
n

e
q
u
a
l
l
y

d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
e
d

w
e
e
k
l
y

l
o
a
d

r
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n

s
c
h
e
d
u
l
e
.
(4
)

U
t
i
l
i
t
y

C
o
s
t

r
e
s
t
a
t
e
d

f
r
o
m

p
r
e
v
i
o
u
s
l
y

re
p
o
r
t
e
d

$
4
,
9
1
0
.
'10)
co CD 000)o CD30):J0-iena:
CD s:
0):J0)
co CD3 CDa Š'
:JC~'i
'0o::
'"oo00
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

4
.

D
S
M

E
x
p
e
n
s
e

a
n
d

P
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e

2
0
0
2
-
2
0
0
8

(
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
)
To
t
a
l

C
o
s
t
s
Sa
v
i
n
g
s

a
n
d

D
e
m
a
n
d

R
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
Le
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

C
o
s
t
s
l
'
)
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
An
n
u
a
l
Av
e
r
a
g
e
Pe
a
k
Me
a
s
u
r
e
To
t
a
l
To
t
a
l
Co
s
t
d
)
En
e
r
g
y
De
m
a
n
d
l
e
)
De
m
a
n
d
l
i
j
Li
f
e
Ut
i
l
t
y
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
l
Y
e
a
r
(N
u
m
b
e
r
)
(d
o
l
l
a
r
s
)
(d
o
l
l
a
r
s
)
(k
l
M
)
(a
M
W
)
(M
W
)
(Y
e
a
r
s
)
($
/
k
W
h
)
($
/
k
W
h
)
En
e
r
g
y

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
t

L
i
g
h
t
i
n
g
20
0
2
11
,
6
1
9
$2
4
3
,
0
3
3
$3
1
0
,
6
4
3
3,
2
9
9
,
6
5
4
0.
3
8
7
$0
.
0
1
2
$0
.
0
1
5
20
0
3
12
,
6
6
3
$3
1
4
,
6
4
1
$4
6
4
,
0
5
9
3,
5
9
6
,
1
5
0
0.
4
1
7
$0
.
0
1
4
$0
.
0
2
1
20
0
4
0
20
0
5
43
,
7
6
0
$7
3
,
1
5
2
$1
0
7
,
8
1
0
1,
7
3
4
,
6
4
6
0.
2
0
7
$0
.
0
0
7
$0
.
0
1
0
20
0
6
17
8
,
5
1
4
$2
9
8
,
7
5
4
$5
3
9
,
8
7
7
6,
3
0
2
,
7
9
4
0.
7
2
7
$0
.
0
0
8
$0
.
0
1
4
20
0
7
21
9
,
7
3
9
$5
5
7
,
6
4
6
$4
3
3
,
6
2
6
7,
2
0
7
,
4
3
9
0.
8
2
7
$0
.
0
1
2
$0
.
0
1
0
20
0
8
43
6
,
2
3
4
$1
,
0
1
8
,
2
9
2
$7
9
3
,
2
6
5
14
,
3
0
9
,
4
4
1.
6
3
7
$0
.
0
1
1
$0
.
0
0
9
To
t
a
l
90
2
,
5
2
8
$2
,
5
0
5
,
5
1
8
$2
,
6
4
9
,
2
8
0
36
,
4
5
0
,
1
2
7
7
$0
.
0
1
1
$0
.
0
1
2
En
e
r
g
y

H
o
u
s
e

C
a
l
l
s
20
0
2
17
$2
6
,
0
5
3
$2
6
,
0
5
3
25
,
9
8
9
0.
0
0
20
$0
.
0
8
2
$0
.
0
8
2
20
0
3
42
0
$1
6
7
,
0
7
6
$1
6
7
,
0
7
6
60
2
,
7
2
3
0.
0
7
20
$0
.
0
2
3
$0
.
0
2
3
20
0
4
1,
7
0
8
$7
2
5
,
9
8
1
$7
2
5
,
9
8
1
2,
3
4
9
,
7
8
3
0.
2
7
20
$0
.
0
2
5
$0
.
0
2
5
20
0
5
89
1
$3
7
5
,
6
1
0
$3
7
5
,
6
1
0
1,
7
7
5
,
7
7
0
0.
2
0
20
$0
.
0
1
7
$0
.
0
1
7
20
0
6
81
9
$3
3
6
,
7
0
1
$3
3
6
,
7
0
1
77
7
,
2
4
4
0.
0
9
20
$0
.
0
3
5
$0
.
0
3
5
20
0
7
70
0
$3
3
6
,
3
7
2
$6
7
,
6
1
6
69
9
,
8
9
9
0.
0
8
20
$0
.
0
3
9
$0
.
0
3
9
20
0
8
1,
0
9
9
$4
8
4
,
3
7
9
$4
8
4
,
3
7
9
88
3
,
0
3
8
0.
1
0
20
$0
.
0
4
5
$0
.
0
4
5
To
t
a
l
5,
6
5
4
$2
,
4
5
2
,
1
7
2
$2
,
1
8
3
,
4
1
6
7,
0
8
8
,
4
5
7
20
$0
.
0
2
8
$0
.
0
2
5
(a
)

L
e
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

C
o
s
t
s

a
r
e

b
a
s
e
d

o
n

f
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l

i
n
p
u
t
s

f
r
o
m

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
'
s

2
0
0
6

I
n
t
e
g
r
a
t
e
d

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e

P
l
a
n

a
n
d

c
a
l
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s

i
n
c
l
u
d
e

l
i
n
e

l
o
s
s

a
d
j
u
s
t
e
d

e
n
e
r
g
y

s
a
v
i
n
g
s
.
(b
)

P
r
o
g
r
a
m

L
i
f
e

B
e
n
e
f
i
t
/
C
o
s
t

R
a
t
i
o
s

a
r
e

p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d

f
o
r

a
c
t
i
v
e
,

n
o
n
-
s
t
a
t
u
t
o
r
y

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s

o
n
l
y
.
(c
)

T
h
e

T
o
t
a
l

U
t
i
l
i
t
y

C
o
s
t

i
s

a
l
l

c
o
s
t
s

i
n
c
u
r
r
d

b
y

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

t
o

i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t

a
n
d

m
a
n
a
g
e

a

D
S
M

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
.
(d
)

T
h
e

T
o
t
a
l

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e

C
o
s
t

i
s

t
h
e

t
o
t
a
l

e
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s

f
o
r

a

D
S
M

p
r
o
g
r
a
m

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
o
i
n
t

o
f
v
i
e
w

o
f

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

a
n
d

i
t
s

c
u
s
t
o
m
e
r
s

a
s

a

1
J
0
1
e
.
(e
)

A
v
e
r
a
g
e

D
e
m
a
n
d

=

A
n
n
u
a
l

E
n
e
r
g
y

/
8
,
7
6
0

a
n
n
u
a
l

h
o
u
r
s
.
(f
)

S
u
m
m
e
r

P
e
a
k

D
e
m
a
n
d

i
s

r
e
p
o
r
t
e
d

f
o
r

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s

t
h
a
t

d
i
r
e
c
t
l
y

r
e
d
u
c
e

l
o
a
d

o
r

m
e
a
s
u
r
e

d
e
m
a
n
d

r
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
s

d
u
r
i
n
g

s
u
m
m
e
r

p
e
a
k

s
e
a
s
o
n
.
(5
)

U
t
i
l
t
y

c
o
s
t
s

r
e
s
t
a
t
e
d

f
r
o
m

$
1
8
3
,
6
5
3

f
o
r

h
i
s
t
o
r
i
c
a
l

r
e
p
o
r
t
i
n
g

p
r
i
o
r

t
o

t
h
e

2
0
0
6

D
S
M

A
n
n
u
a
l

R
e
p
o
r
t
.
(6
)

U
t
i
l
i
t
y

c
o
s
t
s

r
e
s
t
a
t
e
d

f
r
o
m

$
7
2
5
,
7
3
2

f
o
r

h
i
s
t
o
r
i
c
a
l

r
e
p
o
r
t
i
n
g

p
r
i
o
r

t
o

t
h
e

2
0
0
6

D
S
M

A
n
n
u
a
l

R
e
p
o
r
t
.
Ut
i
l
t
y
Be
n
e
f
i
t
/
C
o
s
t
Ra
t
i
o
Ra
t
i
o
s
l
b
l
To
t
a
l
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
Be
n
e
f
i
t
/
C
o
s
t
Ra
t
i
o
4.
5
6

4
.
3
1
2.
2
0
2.
2
0
):
'0'0 CD:J0-g'
enl'0'0 CD:J0-X'
.¡
(5
)
(6
)
0-
0)::o '1 ~..()o3'00):J-.
0
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

4
.

D
S
M

E
x
p
e
n
s
e

a
n
d

P
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e

2
0
0
2
-
2
0
0
8

(
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
)
0.
CD
Q)
3
~
Q)
0
:J
Pr
o
g
r
a
m

L
i
f
e

B
e
n
e
f
i
t
/
C
o
s
t
"'
0.
To
t
a
l

C
o
s
t
s
Sa
v
i
n
g
s

a
n
d

D
e
m
a
n
d

R
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
Le
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

C
o
s
t
s
(
a
)
Ra
t
i
o
s
l
b
)
0
i(j
To
t
a
l
~
a:
CD
CD
Ut
i
l
t
y
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
.,
š:
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
An
n
u
a
l
Av
e
r
a
g
e
Pe
a
k
Me
a
s
u
r
e
To
t
a
l
To
t
a
l
Be
n
e
f
i
t
/
C
o
s
t
Be
n
e
f
i
t
/
C
o
s
t
()0
Q)
Pa
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
n
t
s
Ut
i
l
i
t
y

C
a
s
t
l
e
)
Co
s
t
(
d
)
En
e
r
g
y
De
m
a
n
d
(
e
)
De
m
a
n
d
1
n
Li
f
e
Ut
i
l
i
t
y
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
Ra
t
i
o
Ra
t
i
o
3
:J
(N
u
m
b
e
r
)
(d
o
l
l
a
r
s
)
(d
o
l
l
a
r
s
)
(k
W
h
)
(a
M
W
)
(M
W
)
($
l
k
W
h
)
($
/
k
W
h
)
"0
Q)
Pr
o
g
r
a
N
e
a
r
(Y
e
a
r
s
)
Q)
to
:J
CD
EN
E
R
G
Y

S
T
A
R
'
"

H
o
m
e
s
-.
3
No
r
t
h
w
e
s
t
CD:J
20
0
3
0
$1
3
,
5
9
7
$1
3
,
5
9
7
-;i
20
0
4
44
$1
4
0
,
1
6
5
$3
3
5
,
4
3
7
10
1
,
2
0
0
0.0
1
0.
0
9
25
$0
.
1
0
3
$0
.
2
4
6
(7
)
:J:J
20
0
5
20
0
$2
5
3
,
1
0
5
$3
1
5
,
3
1
1
41
5
,
6
0
0
0.
0
5
0.
4
0
25
$0
.
0
4
5
$0
.
0
5
6
i:Q)
20
0
6
43
9
$4
6
9
,
6
0
9
$6
0
2
,
6
5
1
91
2
,
2
4
2
0.
1
0
0.
8
8
25
$0
.
0
3
8
$0
.
0
4
9
;0
20
0
7
30
3
$4
7
5
,
0
4
4
$4
0
0
,
6
3
7
62
9
,
6
3
4
0.
0
7
0.6
1
25
$0
.
0
5
6
$0
.
0
4
7
CD
"0
20
0
8
25
4
$3
0
2
,
0
6
1
$3
7
5
,
0
0
7
46
8
,
9
5
8
0.
0
5
0.6
1
25
$0
.
0
4
8
$0
.
0
5
9
0;:
To
t
a
l
1,
2
4
0
$1
,
6
5
3
,
5
8
1
$2
,
0
4
2
,
6
4
1
2,
5
2
7
,
6
3
4
25
$0
.
0
4
9
$0
.
0
6
0
1.
7
6
1.
4
3
I\
He
a
t
i
n
g

&

C
o
o
l
i
n
g

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
y
00
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
00
20
0
6
0
$1
7
,
4
4
4
$1
7
,
4
4
4
20
0
7
4
$4
8
8
,
2
1
1
$4
9
4
,
9
8
9
1,
5
9
5
0.
0
0
18
$2
7
.
3
4
4
$2
7
.
7
1
0
20
0
8
35
9
$4
7
3
,
5
5
1
$5
9
9
,
7
7
1
56
1
,
4
4
1
0.
0
6
18
$0
.
0
7
3
$0
.
0
9
2
To
t
a
l
36
3
$9
7
9
,
2
0
7
$1
,
1
1
2
,
2
0
4
56
3
,
0
3
6
18
$0
.
1
5
0
$0
.
1
7
0
0.
5
3
0.
2
8
Ho
m
e

P
r
o
d
u
c
t
s

P
r
o
g
r
a
m
20
0
7
0
$9
,
2
7
5
$9
,
2
7
5
20
0
8
3,0
3
4
$2
5
0
,
8
6
0
$4
6
8
,
0
5
6
54
1
.
6
1
5
0.
0
6
15
$0
.
0
4
4
$0
.
0
8
2
To
t
a
l
3,
0
3
4
$2
6
0
,
1
3
5
$4
7
7
,
3
3
1
54
1
,
6
1
5
15
$0
.
0
4
4
$0
.
0
8
2
1.
4
2
0.
7
7
Ho
m
e

W
e
a
t
h
e
r
i
z
a
t
i
o
n

P
i
l
o
t
20
0
8
16
$5
2
,
8
0
7
$4
8
,
1
6
2
71
,
6
8
0
0.
0
1
25
$0
.
0
5
5
$0
.
0
5
0
To
t
a
l
16
$5
2
,
8
0
7
$4
8
,
1
6
2
71
,
6
8
0
25
$0
.
0
5
5
$0
.
0
5
0
1.
3
1
1.
4
3
(a
)

L
e
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

C
o
s
t
s

a
r
e

b
a
s
e
d

o
n

f
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l

i
n
p
u
t
s

f
r
o
m

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
'
s

2
0
0
6

I
n
t
e
g
r
a
t
e
d

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e

P
l
a
n

a
n
d

c
a
l
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s

i
n
c
l
u
d
e

l
i
n
e

l
o
s
s

a
d
j
u
s
t
e
d

e
n
e
r
g
y

s
a
v
i
n
g
s
.
;i
"0
(b
)

P
r
o
g
r
a
m

L
i
f
e

B
e
n
e
f
i
t
l
C
o
s
t

R
a
t
i
o
s

a
r
e

p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d

f
o
r

a
c
t
i
v
e
,

n
o
n
-
s
t
a
t
u
t
o
r
y

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s

o
n
l
y
.
"0 CD
(c
)

T
h
e

T
o
t
a
l

U
t
i
i
t
y

C
o
s
t

i
s

a
l
l

c
o
s
t
s

i
n
c
u
r
r
d

b
y

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

t
o

i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t

a
n
d

m
a
n
a
g
e

a

D
S
M

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
.
:J0.
(d
)

T
h
e

T
o
t
a
l

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e

C
o
s
t

i
s

t
h
e

t
o
t
a
l

e
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s

f
o
r

a

D
S
M

p
r
o
g
r
a
m

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
o
i
n
t

o
f
v
i
e
w

o
f

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

a
n
d

i
t
s

c
u
s
t
o
m
e
r
s

a
s

a

w
h
o
l
e
.
õ'CD
(e
)

A
v
e
r
a
g
e

D
e
m
a
n
d

=

A
n
n
u
a
l

E
n
e
r
g
y

/
8
,
7
6
0

a
n
n
u
a
l

h
o
u
r
s
.
(/
(f
)

S
u
m
m
e
r

P
e
a
k

D
e
m
a
n
d

i
s

r
e
p
o
r
t
e
d

f
o
r

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s

t
h
a
t

d
i
r
e
c
t
l
y

r
e
d
u
c
e

l
o
a
d

o
r

m
e
a
s
u
r
e

d
e
m
a
n
d

r
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
s

d
u
r
i
n
g

s
u
m
m
e
r

p
e
a
k

s
e
a
s
o
n
.
l
(7
)

E
n
e
r
g
y

s
a
v
i
n
g
s

b
a
s
e
d

o
n

N
E
E
A

s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
i
z
e
d

p
e
r

h
o
m
e

k
\
l

s
a
v
i
n
g
s

e
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
s
.
"0
"'
"0
Q)
CD
to
:J
CD
0.
00
x'
..
.¡
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

4
.

D
S
M

E
x
p
e
n
s
e

a
n
d

P
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e

2
0
0
2
-
2
0
0
8

(
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
)
'1
):
l:
'0
co
'0
CD
Le
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

C
o
s
t
s
l
-
)
Ra
t
i
o
s
(
b
)
CD
(X
To
t
a
l

C
o
s
t
s
Sa
v
i
n
g
s

a
n
d

D
e
m
a
n
d

R
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
::0-
(X
To
t
a
l
Õ'
Ut
i
l
i
t
y
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
CD
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
An
n
u
a
l
Av
e
r
a
g
e
Pe
a
k
Me
a
s
u
r
e
To
t
a
l
To
t
a
l
Be
n
e
f
i
t
/
C
o
s
t
Be
n
e
f
i
t
/
C
o
s
t
en
Pa
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
n
t
s
Ut
i
l
i
t
y

C
o
s
t
(
e
)
Co
s
t
(
d
)
En
e
r
g
y
De
m
a
n
d
(
e
)
De
m
a
n
d
(
f
)
Li
f
e
Ut
i
l
i
t
y
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
Ra
t
i
o
Ra
t
i
o
l
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
l
Y
e
a
r
(N
u
m
b
e
r
)
(d
o
l
l
a
r
s
)
(d
o
l
l
a
r
s
)
(k
W
h
)
(a
M
W
)
(M
W
)
(Y
e
a
r
s
)
($
/
k
W
h
)
l$
/
k
W
h
)
'0'0
Or
e
g
o
n

R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
CD::
We
a
t
h
e
r
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
0-
20
0
2
24
-$
6
6
2
$2
3
,
9
7
1
4,
5
8
0
0.
0
0
25
$0
.
0
1
0
$0
.
3
8
9
(8
)
x'~
20
0
3
0
-$
9
4
3
(9
)
20
0
4
4
$1
,
0
5
7
$1
,
0
5
7
20
0
5
4
$6
1
2
$3
,
0
8
7,
9
2
7
0.
0
0
25
$0
.
0
0
6
$0
.
0
3
4
20
0
6
0
$4
,
1
2
6
$4
,
1
2
6
(1
0
)
20
0
7
1
$3
,
7
8
1
$5
,
5
8
9
9,
9
7
1
0.
0
0
25
$0
.
0
2
8
$0
.
0
4
2
20
0
8
3
$7
,
4
1
7
$2
8
,
7
5
2
22
,
1
9
6
0.
0
0
25
$0
.
0
2
5
$0
.
0
9
6
To
t
a
l
36
$1
5
,
3
8
9
$6
7
,
1
0
3
44
,
6
7
4
25
$0
.
0
2
6
$0
.
1
1
2
(1
1

)
Re
b
a
t
e

A
d
v
a
n
t
a
g
e
20
0
3
73
$2
7
,
3
7
2
$7
9
,
3
9
9
22
7
,
4
3
4
0.
0
3
45
$0
.
0
0
8
$0
.
0
2
2
(1
2
)
20
0
4
10
5
$5
2
,
1
8
7
$1
7
8
,
7
1
2
33
2
,
5
8
7
0.
0
4
45
$0
.
0
1
0
$0
.
0
3
4
20
0
5
98
$4
6
,
1
7
3
$1
5
8
,
4
6
2
31
2
,
3
1
1
0.
0
4
45
$0
.
0
0
9
$0
.
0
3
2
0
20
0
6
10
2
$5
2
,
6
7
3
$1
4
0
,
2
8
9
33
3
,
4
9
4
0.
0
4
45
$0
.
0
1
0
$0
.
0
2
7
CD
20
0
7
12
3
$8
9
,
2
6
9
$1
8
2
,
1
5
2
55
4
,
0
1
8
0.
0
6
45
$0
.
0
1
0
$0
.
0
2
1
3l:
20
0
8
10
7
$9
0
,
8
8
8
$1
7
9
,
8
6
8
46
3
,
4
0
1
0.
0
5
45
$0
.
0
1
2
$0
.
0
2
5
::0-
To
t
a
l
60
8
$3
5
8
,
5
6
3
$9
1
8
,
8
8
2
2,
2
2
3
,
2
4
5
45
$0
.
0
1
0
$0
.
0
2
6
7.
1
9
2.
8
0
i en
Win
d
o
w

A
l
C

T
r
a
d
e

U
p

P
i
l
o
t
a:CD
20
0
3
99
$6
,
6
8
7
$1
0
,
4
9
2
14
,
4
5
4
0.
0
0
12
$0
.
0
5
1
$0
.
0
7
9
š:
To
t
a
l
99
$6
,
6
8
7
$1
0
,
4
9
2
14
,
4
5
4
12
$0
.
0
5
1
$0
.
0
7
9
l:::
(a
)

L
e
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

C
o
s
t

a
r
e

b
a
s
e
d

o
n

f
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l

i
n
p
u
t
s

f
r
o
m

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
r
'
s

2
0
0
6

In
t
e
g
r
a
t
e
d

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e

P
l
a
n

a
n
d

c
a
l
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s

i
n
c
l
u
d
e

l
i
n
e

l
o
s
s

a
d
j
u
s
t
e
d

e
n
e
r
g
y

s
a
v
i
n
g
s
.
l:CO
(b
)

P
r
o
g
r
a
m

L
i
f
e

B
e
n
e
f
i
t
C
o
s
t

R
a
t
i
o
s

a
r
e

p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d

f
o
r

a
c
t
i
v
e
,

n
o
n
-
s
t
a
t
u
t
o
r
y

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s

o
n
l
y
.
CD3
(c
)

T
h
e

T
o
t
a
l

U
t
i
l
i
t
y

C
o
s
t

i
s

a
l
l

c
o
s
t
s

i
n
c
u
r
r
e
d

b
y

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

t
o

i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t

a
n
d

m
a
n
a
g
e

a

D
S
M

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
.
CD::
(d
)

T
h
e

T
o
t
a
l

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e

C
o
s
t

i
s

t
h
e

t
o
t
a
l

e
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s

f
o
r

a

D
S
M

p
r
o
g
r
a
m

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
o
i
n
t

o
f

vie
w

o
f

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

a
n
d

i
t
s

c
u
s
t
o
m
e
r
s

a
s

a

w
h
o
l
e
.
0-
..
l:
):
(e
)

A
v
e
r
a
g
e

D
e
m
a
n
d

=

A
n
n
u
a
l

E
n
e
r
g
y

/
8
,
7
6
0

a
n
n
u
a
l

h
o
u
r
s
.
::
::
0
::
(f
)

S
u
m
m
e
r

P
e
a
k

D
e
m
a
n
d

i
s

r
e
p
o
r
t
e
d

f
o
r

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s

t
h
a
t

d
i
r
e
c
t
l
y

r
e
d
u
c
e

l
o
a
d

o
r

m
e
a
s
u
r
e

d
e
m
a
n
d

r
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
s

d
u
r
i
n
g

s
u
m
m
e
r

p
e
a
k

s
e
a
s
o
n
.
'1
i:!l
0
(8
)

U
t
i
l
i
t
y

C
o
s
t

r
e
p
o
r
t
s

r
e
v
e
r
s
a
l

o
f

$
2
7
7
8

a
s
s
e
t

f
r
o
m

2
0
0
1

e
x
p
e
n
s
e
,

t
h
i
s

a
m
o
u
n
t

i
s

i
n
c
l
u
d
e
d

i
n

l
e
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

c
o
s
t

c
a
l
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
.
:E
::
In

a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
,

U
t
i
l
t
y

C
o
s
t

a
l
s
o

r
e
p
o
r
t
s

f
u
n
d
s

s
u
b
s
e
q
u
e
n
l
l
y

c
o
l
l
e
c
t
e
d

o
n

b
a
d

l
o
a
n

l
M
i
l
e
o
f
f

e
x
p
e
n
s
e
.

T
h
e
s
e

f
u
n
d
s

a
r
e

e
x
c
l
u
d
e
d

f
r
m

t
h
e

a
n
n
u
a
l
l
e
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

c
o
s
t

c
a
l
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
.
CD
CD
..
'0
(9
)

U
t
i
l
i
t
y

C
o
s
t

r
e
f
l
e
c
t
s

c
o
l
l
e
c
t
e
d

f
u
n
d
s

o
n

p
r
e
v
i
o
u
s

b
a
d

l
o
a
n

l
M
i
t
e
o
f
f
.
()
0
0
::
(1
0
)

U
t
i
l
i
t
y

C
o
s
t

r
e
f
l
e
c
t
s

o
n
l
y

a
u
d
i
t

a
n
d

a
d
m
i
n
i
s
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

c
o
s
t
s
;

t
h
e
r
e

w
a
s

n
o

f
u
r
t
h
e
r

a
c
t
i
v
i
t
y

i
n

2
0
0
6
.
3
I"
'0
0
(1
1
)

L
e
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

c
o
s
t

c
a
l
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n

i
n
c
l
u
d
e
s

b
a
d

l
o
a
n

l
M
i
t
e
-
o
f
f

e
x
p
e
n
s
e

a
n
d

f
u
n
d
s

c
o
l
l
e
c
t
e
d

1
i
o
m

p
r
e
v
i
o
u
s
l
y

l
M
i
l
l
e
n
-
o
f
f

l
o
a
n
s
.
l:
0
::
(X
(1
2
)

U
t
i
H
t
y

C
o
s
t

r
e
s
t
a
t
e
d

i
n

2
0
D
6
1
i
o
m

$
3
7
,
3
1
9

to

r
e
f
l
e
c
t

t
o
t
a
l

e
x
p
e
n
s
e
.
'.
0
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

4
.

D
S
M

E
x
p
e
n
s
e

a
n
d

P
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e

2
0
0
2
-
2
0
0
8

(
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
)
0.
CD
Q)
3
::
Q)
0
:J
Pr
o
g
r
a
m

L
i
f
e

B
e
n
e
f
i
t
/
C
o
s
t
""
0.
Le
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

C
o
s
t
s
l
a
)
Ra
t
i
o
s
l
b
)
0
i
To
t
a
l

C
o
s
t
s
Sa
v
i
n
g
s

a
n
d

D
e
m
a
n
d

R
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
CJ
To
t
a
l
=E
e:
CD
CD
Ut
i
l
t
y
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
..()
s:
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
An
n
u
a
l
Av
e
r
a
g
e
Pe
a
k
Me
a
s
u
r
e
To
t
a
l
To
t
a
l
Be
n
e
f
i
t
/
C
o
s
t
Be
n
e
f
i
t
/
C
o
s
t
0
Q)
Pa
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
n
t
s
Ut
i
l
i
t
y

C
a
s
t
l
e
)
Co
s
t
(
d
)
En
e
r
g
y
De
m
a
n
d
(
e
)
De
m
a
n
d
i
n
Li
f
e
Ut
i
l
i
t
y
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
Ra
t
i
o
Ra
t
i
o
3
:J
"0
Q)
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
l
Y
e
a
r
(N
u
m
b
e
r
)
(d
o
l
l
a
r
s
)
(d
o
l
l
a
r
s
)
(k
W
h
)
(a
M
W
)
(M
W
)
(Y
e
a
r
s
)
($
/
k
W
h
.
)
($
/
k
W
h
.
)
Q)
CO
:J
CD
-o
3 CD
WA
Q
C
-
I
d
a
h
o
:J-
20
0
2
19
7
$2
3
5
,
0
4
8
$4
9
2
,
1
3
9
;i
20
0
3
20
8
$2
2
8
,
1
3
4
$4
8
3
,
3
6
9
(1
3
)
:J:Jc:
20
0
4
26
9
$5
1
6
,
8
8
2
$8
5
9
,
4
8
2
1,
2
7
1
,
6
7
7
0.
1
5
25
$0
.
0
2
9
$0
.
0
5
0
~
20
0
5
57
0
$1
,
4
0
2
,
4
8
7
$1
,
9
2
7
,
4
2
4
3,
1
7
9
,
3
1
1
0.
3
6
25
$0
.
0
3
3
$0
.
0
4
5
::CD
20
0
6
54
0
$1
,
4
4
9
,
8
0
7
$2
,
2
3
1
,
0
8
6
2,
9
5
8
,
0
2
4
0.
3
4
25
$0
.
0
3
7
$0
.
0
5
6
"00
20
0
7
39
7
$1
,
2
9
0
,
0
1
7
$1
,
7
5
7
,
1
0
5
3,
2
9
6
,
0
1
9
0.
3
8
25
$0
.
0
2
9
$0
.
0
4
0
;:
'"
20
0
8
43
9
$1
,
3
7
6
,
5
4
3
$1
,
7
5
5
,
7
4
9
4,
0
6
4
,
3
0
1
0.
4
6
25
$0
.
0
2
5
$0
.
0
3
2
0
To
t
a
l
2,
6
2
0
$6
,
4
9
8
,
9
1
8
$9
,
5
0
6
,
3
5
4
14
,
7
6
9
,
3
3
2
25
$0
.
0
3
3
$0
.
0
4
8
2.
1
7
1.
5
0
000
WA
Q
C
-
O
r
e
g
o
n
20
0
2
31
$2
4
,
7
7
3
$4
7
,
2
2
1
68
,
3
2
3
0.
0
1
25
$0
.
0
2
7
$0
.
0
5
1
20
0
3
29
$2
2
,
2
5
5
$4
2
,
3
3
5
10
2
,
6
4
3
0.
0
1
25
$0
.
0
1
6
$0
.
0
3
1
20
0
4
17
$1
4
,
5
8
6
$2
5
,
4
5
2
28
,
4
3
6
0.
0
0
25
$0
.
0
3
5
$0
.
0
6
7
20
0
5
28
$4
4
,
3
4
8
$5
9
,
4
3
94
,
2
7
9
0.
0
1
25
$0
.
0
3
5
$0
.
0
4
7
20
0
6
0
$5
,
5
6
6
20
0
7
11
$3
3
,
6
0
7
$4
1
,
7
0
0
42
,
1
0
8
0.
0
0
25
$0
.
0
5
4
$0
.
0
7
4
20
0
8
13
$4
2
,
9
3
2
$7
4
,
0
4
8
73
,
8
4
1
0.
0
1
25
$0
.
0
4
0
$0
.
0
6
8
To
t
a
l
13
0
$1
8
8
,
6
7
$2
9
0
,
1
9
9
40
9
,
6
3
0
25
$0
.
0
3
3
$0
.
0
5
3
2.
0
2
1.
2
6
WA
Q
C
-
B
P
A

S
u
p
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
l
20
0
2
75
$5
5
,
9
6
6
$1
1
8
,
2
5
5
31
1
,
3
4
7
0.
0
4
25
$0
.
0
1
3
$0
.
0
2
8
(1
4
)
20
0
3
57
$4
9
,
8
9
5
$1
0
6
,
9
1
5
22
3
,
5
9
1
0.
0
3
25
$0
.
0
1
7
$0
.
0
3
6
;i
20
0
4
40
$4
9
,
8
8
5
$1
0
5
,
0
2
1
12
5
,
9
1
9
0.
0
1
25
$0
.
0
4
1
$0
.
0
6
2
"0"0
To
t
a
l
17
2
$1
5
5
,
7
4
6
$3
3
0
,
1
9
1
66
0
,
8
5
7
25
$0
.
0
2
0
$0
.
0
3
7
CD:J
(a
)

l
e
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

C
o
s
t
s

a
r
e

b
a
s
e
d

o
n

f
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l

i
n
p
u
t
s

f
r
o
m

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
'
s

2
0
0
6

I
n
t
e
g
r
a
t
e
d

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e

P
l
a
n

a
n
d

c
a
l
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s

i
n
c
l
u
d
e

l
i
n
e

l
o
s
s

a
d
j
u
s
t
e
d

e
n
e
r
g
y

s
a
v
i
n
g
s
.
0.õ'
(b
)

P
r
o
g
r
a
m

l
i
f
e

B
e
n
e
f
i
t
l
C
o
s
t

R
a
t
i
o
s

a
r
e

p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d

f
o
r

a
c
t
i
v
e
,

n
o
n
-
s
t
a
t
u
t
o
r
y

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s

o
n
l
y
.
CDCJ
(c
)

T
h
e

T
o
t
a
l

U
t
i
l
i
t
y

C
o
s
t

i
s

a
l
l

c
o
s
t
s

i
n
c
u
r
r
e
d

b
y

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

t
o

i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t

a
n
d

m
a
n
a
g
e

a

D
S
M

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
.
l
(d
)

T
h
e

T
o
t
a
l

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e

C
o
s
t

i
s

t
h
e

t
o
t
a
l

e
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s

f
o
r

a

D
S
M

p
r
o
g
r
a
m

t
o
m

t
h
e

p
o
i
n
t

o
f

vie
w

o
f

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

a
n
d

i
t
s

c
u
s
t
o
m
e
r
s

a
s

a

w
l
o
l
e
.
"0
""
"0
Q)
(e
)

A
v
e
r
a
g
e

D
e
m
a
n
d

=

A
n
n
u
a
l

E
n
e
r
g
y

/
8
,
7
6
0

a
n
n
u
a
l

h
o
u
r
s
.
CD
CO
:J
CD
(f
)

S
u
m
m
e
r

P
e
a
k

D
e
m
a
n
d

i
s

r
e
p
o
r
t
e
d

f
o
r

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s

t
h
a
t

d
i
r
e
c
t
l
y

r
e
d
u
c
e

l
o
a
d

o
r

m
e
a
s
u
r
e

d
e
m
a
n
d

r
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
s

d
u
r
i
n
g

s
u
m
m
e
r

p
e
a
k

s
e
a
s
o
n
.
0.
00
X'
CO
(1
3
)

T
o
t
a
l

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e

C
o
s
t

r
e
s
t
a
t
e
d

i
n

2
0
0
5

t
o

i
n
c
l
u
d
e

f
e
d
e
r
a
l

f
u
n
d
i
n
g

a
d
m
i
n
i
s
t
e
r
e
d

b
y

C
A
P

a
g
e
n
c
i
e
s
.

2
0
0
2
-
2
0
0
3

s
a
v
i
n
g
s

n
o
t

r
e
p
o
r
t
e
d

d
u
e

t
o

i
n
t
e
g
r
a
t
i
o
n

o
f

fu
e
l

t
y
e
s
.
.¡
(1
4
)

B
e
g
i
n
n
i
n
g

i
n

2
0
0
5
,

B
P
A

f
u
n
d
s

w
e
r
e

n
o

l
o
n
g
e
r

a
p
p
l
i
e
d

t
o

C
A
P

a
g
e
n
c
y

p
a
y
m
e
n
t
s
;

B
P
A

e
x
p
e
n
s
e

i
n

s
u
b
s
e
q
u
e
n
t

y
e
a
r
s

i
s

r
e
f
l
e
c
t
e
d

i
n

t
h
e

r
e
s
p
e
c
t
i
v
e

s
t
a
t
e

e
x
p
e
n
s
e
s
.
"t
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

4
.

D
S
M

E
x
p
e
n
s
e

a
n
d

P
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e

2
0
0
2
-
2
0
0
8

(
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
)
~
Q)
"0
co
"0
CD
CD
(0
::
0
Pr
o
g
r
a
m

L
i
f
e

B
e
n
e
f
i
t
/
C
o
s
t
0.
To
t
a
l

C
o
s
t
s
Sa
v
i
n
g
s

a
n
d

D
e
m
a
n
d

R
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
Le
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

C
o
s
t
s
l
'
)
Ra
t
i
o
s
1
b
)
õ'CD
To
t
a
l
CI
Ut
i
l
i
t
y
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
l
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
An
n
u
a
l
Av
e
r
a
g
e
Pe
a
k
Me
a
s
u
r
e
To
t
a
l
To
t
a
l
Be
n
e
f
i
t
/
C
o
s
t
Be
n
e
f
i
t
/
C
o
s
t
Co
s
t
d
)
En
e
r
g
y
De
m
a
n
d
l
e
)
De
m
a
n
d
l
f
j
Li
f
e
Ut
i
l
i
t
y
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
Ra
t
i
o
Ra
t
i
o
"0"0
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
l
Y
e
a
r
(N
u
m
b
e
r
)
(d
o
l
l
a
r
s
)
(d
o
l
l
a
r
s
)
(k
W
h
)
(a
M
W
)
(M
W
)
(Y
e
a
r
s
)
($
/
k
W
h
)
($
/
k
W
h
)
CD::0.x'
Ai
r

C
a
r
e

P
l
u
s

P
i
l
o
t
i
.
t
20
0
3
4
$5
,
7
6
4
$9
,
0
6
1
33
,
9
7
6
0.
0
0
10
$0
.
0
2
1
$0
.
0
3
3
20
0
4
0
$3
4
4
$3
4
4
To
t
a
l
4
$6
,
1
0
8
$9
,
4
0
5
33
,
9
7
6
10
$0
.
0
2
2
$0
.
0
3
4
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
y
20
0
4
0
$2
8
,
8
2
1
$2
8
,
8
2
1
20
0
5
12
$1
9
4
,
0
6
6
$2
3
3
,
1
4
9
49
4
,
2
3
9
0.
0
6
0.
1
6
12
$0
.
0
4
3
$0
.
0
5
2
20
0
6
40
$3
7
4
,
0
0
8
$4
6
3
,
7
7
0
70
4
,
5
4
1
0.
0
8
0.
3
4
12
$0
.
0
5
8
$0
.
0
7
2
20
0
7
22
$6
6
9
,
0
3
2
$8
2
9
,
6
0
0
2,
8
1
7
,
2
4
8
0.
3
2
0.
4
5
12
$0
.
0
1
5
$0
.
0
4
0
20
0
8
60
$1
,
0
5
5
,
0
0
9
$1
,
6
7
3
,
2
6
8
6,
5
9
8
,
1
2
3
0.
7
5
0.
9
6
12
$0
.
0
1
7
$0
.
0
2
8
To
t
a
l
13
4
$2
,
3
2
0
,
9
3
7
$3
,
2
2
8
,
6
0
9
10
,
6
1
4
,
1
5
1
12
$0
.
0
2
4
$0
.
0
2
6
2.
1
4
1.
5
5
0
Ea
s
y

U
p
g
r
a
d
e
s
CD
20
0
6
0
$3
1
,
8
1
9
$3
1
,
8
1
9
3
20
0
7
10
4
$7
1
1
,
4
9
4
$1
,
8
8
2
,
0
3
5
5,
1
8
3
,
6
4
0
0.5
9
0.
7
8
12
$0
.
0
1
5
$0
.
0
4
0
Q)::
20
0
8
68
5
$2
,
9
9
2
,
2
6
1
$1
0
,
0
9
6
,
6
2
7
25
,
9
2
8
,
3
9
1
2.9
6
4.
4
9
12
$0
.
0
1
3
$0
.
0
4
3
0.ien
To
t
a
l
78
9
$3
,
7
3
5
,
5
7
4
$1
2
,
0
1
0
,
4
8
1
31
,
1
1
2
,
0
3
1
12
$0
.
0
1
3
$0
.
0
4
2
3.
8
8
1.2
1
e:
Ho
l
i
d
a
y

L
i
g
h
t
i
n
g

P
r
o
g
r
a
m
CD s:
20
0
8
14
$2
8
,
7
8
2
$7
3
,
1
0
8
25
9
,
0
9
2
0.
0
3
10
$0
.
0
1
4
$0
.
0
3
5
Q)
To
t
a
l
14
$2
8
,
7
8
2
$7
3
,
1
0
8
::
25
9
,
0
9
2
10
$0
.
0
1
4
$0
.
0
3
5
2.
8
5
1.1
2
Q)
CO
(a
)

l
e
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

C
o
s
t
s

a
r
e

b
a
s
e
d

o
n

f
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l

i
n
p
u
t
s

f
r
o
m

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
'
s

2
0
0
6

I
n
t
e
g
r
a
t
e
d

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e

P
l
a
n

a
n
d

c
a
l
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s

i
n
c
l
u
d
e

l
i
n
e

l
o
s
s

a
d
j
u
s
t
e
d

e
n
e
r
g
y

s
a
v
i
n
g
s
.
CD3
(b
)

P
r
o
g
r
a
m

L
i
f
e

B
e
n
e
f
i
t
l
C
o
s
t

R
a
t
i
o
s

a
r
e

p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d

f
o
r

a
c
t
i
v
e
,

n
o
n
-
s
t
a
t
u
t
o
r
y

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s

o
n
l
y
.
CD
(c
)

T
h
e

T
o
t
a
l

U
t
i
l
i
t
y

C
o
s
t

i
s

a
l
l

c
o
s
t
s

i
n
c
u
r
r
e
d

b
y

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

t
o

i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t

a
n
d

m
a
n
a
g
e

a

D
S
M

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
.
::
0.
..~
(d
)

T
h
e

T
o
t
a
l

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e

C
o
s
t

i
s

t
h
e

t
o
t
a
l

e
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s

f
o
r

a

D
S
M

p
r
o
g
r
a
m

t
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
o
i
n
t

o
f

vi
e
w

o
f

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

a
n
d

i
t
s

c
u
s
t
o
m
e
r
s

a
s

a

w
h
o
l
e
.
Q):T
::
(e
)

A
v
e
r
a
g
e

D
e
m
a
n
d

=

A
n
n
u
a
l

E
n
e
r
g
y

i

8
,
7
6
0

a
n
n
u
a
l

h
o
u
r
s
.
0
::
"t
c:~
(f
)

S
u
m
m
e
r

P
e
a
k

D
e
m
a
n
d

i
s

r
e
p
o
r
t
e
d

f
o
r

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s

t
h
a
t

d
i
r
e
c
t
l
y

r
e
d
u
c
e

l
o
a
d

o
r

m
e
a
s
u
r
e

d
e
m
a
n
d

r
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
s

d
u
r
i
n
g

s
u
m
m
e
r

p
e
a
k

s
e
a
s
o
n
.
0 :E
::
CD
CD
..
"0
("
0
0
;:
3
I\
"0
0
Q)
0
::
CO
-0
0
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

4
.

D
S
M

E
x
p
e
n
s
e

a
n
d

P
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e

2
0
0
2
-
2
0
0
8

(
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
)
a.
CD
Q)
3
::
Q)
0
::
Pr
o
g
r
a
m

L
i
f
e

B
e
n
e
f
i
t
/
C
o
s
t
"'
a.i
To
t
a
l

C
o
s
t
s
Sa
v
i
n
g
s

a
n
d

D
e
m
a
n
d

R
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
Le
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

C
o
s
t
s
l
.
)
Ra
t
i
o
s
1
b
)
0
(f
:E
a:
To
t
a
l
CD
CD
Ut
i
l
i
t
y
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
..()
s:
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
An
n
u
a
l
Av
e
r
a
g
e
Pe
a
k
Me
a
s
u
r
e
To
t
a
l
To
t
a
l
B
e
n
e
f
i
t
l
C
o
s
t
Be
n
e
f
i
t
l
C
o
s
t
0
Q)
Pa
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
n
t
s
Ut
i
l
i
t
y

C
o
s
t
l
e
)
Co
s
t
1
d
)
En
e
r
g
y
De
m
a
n
d
1
e
)
De
m
a
n
d
1
f
)
Li
f
e
Ut
i
l
t
y
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
Ra
t
i
o
Ra
t
i
o
3
::
'0
Q)
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
l
Y
e
a
r
(N
u
m
b
e
r
)
(d
o
l
l
a
r
s
)
(d
o
l
l
a
r
s
)
(k
W
h
)
(a
M
W
)
(M
W
)
(Y
e
a
r
s
)
($
/
k
W
h
)
($
/
k
W
h
)
Q)
CO
::
CD
Or
e
g
o
n

C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l

A
u
d
i
t
s
-.
3 CD
20
0
2
24
$5
,
2
0
0
$5
,
2
0
0
::-
20
0
3
21
$0
$4
,
0
0
0
):
20
0
4
7
$0
$0
::::c:
20
0
5
7
$5
,
4
5
0
$5
,
4
5
0
9l
20
0
6
6
::CD
20
0
7
8
$1
,
9
8
1
$1
,
9
8
1
'00
20
0
8
0
$5
8
$5
8
;:N
To
t
a
l
73
$1
2
,
6
8
9
$1
6
,
6
8
9
(1
5
)
0
Or
e
g
o
n

S
c
h
o
o
l

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
y
000
$8
6
$8
6
$2
4
,
3
7
9
$8
9
,
7
7
1
22
3
,
3
6
8
0.
0
3
12
$0
.
0
1
2
$0
.
0
4
4
12
$0
.
0
1
2
$0
.
0
4
4
Cu
s
t
o
m

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
y
20
0
3
0
$1
,
3
0
3
$1
,
3
0
3
20
0
4
1
$1
1
2
,
3
1
1
$1
3
3
,
4
1
21
1
,
2
9
5
0.
0
2
12
$0
.
0
5
8
$0
.
0
6
9
20
0
5
24
$1
,
1
2
8
,
0
7
6
$3
,
6
5
3
,
1
5
2
12
,
0
1
6
,
6
7
8
1.
3
7
12
$0
.
0
1
0
$0
.
0
3
3
20
0
6
40
$1
,
6
2
5
,
2
1
6
$4
,
2
7
3
,
8
8
5
19
,
2
1
1
,
6
0
5
2.
1
9
12
$0
.
0
0
9
$0
.
0
2
4
20
0
7
49
$3
,
1
6
1
,
8
6
6
$7
,
0
1
2
,
6
8
6
29
,
7
8
9
,
3
0
4
3.
4
0
3.
6
2
12
$0
.
0
1
2
$0
.
0
2
6
20
0
8
10
0
$4
,
0
4
5
,
6
7
1
$1
6
,
3
1
2
,
3
7
9
41
,
0
5
8
,
6
3
9
4.
6
8
4.
7
7
12
$0
.
0
1
1
$0
.
0
4
4
To
t
a
l
21
4
$1
0
,
0
7
4
,
4
4
2
$3
1
,
3
8
6
,
8
4
6
10
2
,
2
8
7
,
5
2
1
12
$0
.
0
1
8
$0
.
0
5
6
4.
8
3
1.
5
5
):
(a
)

L
e
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

C
o
s
t
s

a
r
e

b
a
s
e
d

o
n

f
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l

i
n
p
u
t
s

f
r
o
m

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
'
s

2
0
0
6

I
n
t
e
g
r
a
t
e
d

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e

P
l
a
n

a
n
d

c
a
l
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s

i
n
c
l
u
d
e

l
i
n
e

l
o
s
s

a
d
j
u
s
t
e
d

e
n
e
r
g
y

s
a
v
i
n
g
s
.
'0'0
(b
)

P
r
o
g
r
a
m

L
i
f
e

B
e
n
e
f
i
t
/
C
o
s
t

R
a
t
i
o
s

a
r
e

p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d

f
o
r

a
c
t
i
v
e
,

n
o
n
-
s
t
a
t
u
t
o
r
y

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s

o
n
l
y
.
CD::
(c
)

T
h
e

T
o
t
a
l

U
t
i
l
i
t
y

C
o
s
t

i
s

a
l
l

c
o
s
t
s

i
n
c
u
r
r
e
d

b
y

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

t
o

i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t

a
n
d

m
a
n
a
g
e

a

D
S
M

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
.
a.õ'
(d
)

T
h
e

T
o
t
a
l

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e

C
o
s
t

i
s

t
h
e

t
o
t
a
l

e
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s

f
o
r

a

D
S
M

p
r
o
g
r
a
m

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
o
i
n
t

o
f

vi
e
w

o
f

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

a
n
d

i
t
s

c
u
s
t
o
m
e
r
s

a
s

a

1
M
0
1
e
.
CDC/
(e
)

A
v
e
r
a
g
e

D
e
m
a
n
d

=

A
n
n
u
a
l

E
n
e
r
g
y

1
8
,
7
6
0

a
n
n
u
a
l

h
o
u
r
s
.
l
(f
)

S
u
m
m
e
r

P
e
a
k

D
e
m
a
n
d

i
s

r
e
p
o
r
t
e
d

f
o
r

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s

t
h
a
t

d
i
r
e
c
t
l
y

r
e
d
u
c
e

l
o
a
d

o
r

m
e
a
s
u
r
e

d
e
m
a
n
d

r
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
s

d
u
n
n
g

s
u
m
m
e
r

p
e
a
k

s
e
a
s
o
n
.
'0
"'
'0
Q)
(1
5
)

O
r
e
g
o
n

s
t
a
t
u
t
o
r
y

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
.

T
h
e

c
o
m
p
a
n
y

d
o
e
s

n
o
t

m
o
n
i
t
o
r

c
u
s
t
o
m
e
r

i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n

o
f

a
u
d
i
t

r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s

a
n
d

t
h
u
s

d
o
e
s

n
o
t

e
s
t
i
m
a
t
e

s
a
v
i
n
g
s

f
o
r

t
h
i
s

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
.
CD
CO
::
CD
Au
d
i
t

e
x
p
e
n
s
e

n
o
t

i
n
v
o
l
v
i
n
g

o
u
t
s
i
d
e

c
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
o
r

s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s

a
r
e

b
o
o
k
e
d

t
o

g
e
n
e
r
a
l

c
u
s
t
o
m
e
r

s
e
r
v
i
c
e
.
a.
(0
X'
..
~
"U Q)
co (1 coN o (13 Q)::0-iena:
(1 s:Q)::Q)
co (13(1::.-;i::::c:~::
(1"'o::NooCP
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

4
.

D
S
M

E
x
p
e
n
s
e

a
n
d

P
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e

2
0
0
2
-
2
0
0
8

(
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
)
;i
"'"'(1::0-r,
(1enl"'"'(1::0-x'~
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
l
Y
e
a
r
To
t
a
l

C
o
s
t
s
Sa
v
i
n
g
s

a
n
d

D
e
m
a
n
d

R
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
Le
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

C
o
s
t
s
l
a
)
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
An
n
u
a
l
Av
e
r
a
g
e
Pe
a
k
Me
a
s
u
r
e
To
t
a
l
To
t
a
l
Co
s
t
(
d
)
En
e
r
g
y
De
m
a
n
d
(
e
)
De
m
a
n
d
l
f
)
Li
f
e
Ut
i
l
t
y
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
(d
o
l
l
a
r
s
)
(k
W
h
)
(a
M
W
)
(M
W
)
(Y
e
a
r
s
)
($
/
k
W
h
)
($
/
W
h
)
Ra
t
i
o
s
l
b
)
To
t
a
l
Ut
i
l
i
t
y

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e
Be
n
e
f
i
t
/
C
o
s
t

B
e
n
e
f
i
t
/
C
o
s
t
Ra
t
i
o

R
a
t
i
o
Ir
r
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
y

R
e
w
a
r
d
s
20
0
3
20
0
4
20
0
5
20
0
6
20
0
7
20
0
8
To
t
a
l
2
$4
1
,
0
8
9
$5
4
,
6
0
9
36
,
7
9
2
0.
0
0
0.
0
2
15
$0
.
1
0
6
$0
.
1
4
1
33
$1
2
0
,
8
0
8
$4
0
2
,
9
7
8
80
2
,
8
1
2
0.
0
9
0.
4
5
15
$0
.
0
1
4
$0
.
0
4
8
38
$1
5
0
,
5
7
7
$6
5
7
,
4
6
0
1,
0
1
2
,
8
8
3
0.
1
2
0.
4
0
15
$0
.
0
1
4
$0
.
0
6
2
55
9
$2
,
7
7
9
,
6
2
0
$8
,
5
1
4
,
2
3
1
16
,
9
8
6
,
0
0
8
1.
9
4
5.
1
0
8
$0
.
0
2
4
$0
.
0
7
3
81
6
$2
,
0
0
1
,
9
6
1
$8
,
6
9
4
,
7
7
2
12
,
3
0
4
,
0
7
3
1.
4
0
3.
4
1
8
$0
.
0
2
4
$0
.
1
0
3
96
1
$2
,
1
0
3
,
7
0
2
$5
,
8
5
0
,
7
7
8
11
,
7
4
6
,
3
9
5
1.
3
4
3.
4
7
8
$0
.
0
2
6
$0
.
0
7
3
2,
4
0
9
$7
,
1
9
7
,
7
5
8
$2
4
,
1
7
4
,
8
2
7
42
,
8
8
8
,
9
6
3
8
$0
.
0
2
4
$0
.
8
2
(1
6
)
(1
7
)
5.4
9
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g

O
p
e
r
a
t
o
r

T
r
a
i
n
i
n
g
20
0
3
20
0
4
20
0
5
To
t
a
l
71
$4
8
,
8
5
3
$4
8
,
8
5
3
1,
8
2
5
,
0
0
0
0.
2
1
5
$0
.
0
0
6
$0
.
0
0
6
(1
9
)
26
$4
3
,
9
6
9
$4
3
,
9
6
9
65
0
,
0
0
0
0.
0
5
$0
.
0
1
4
$0
.
0
1
4
7
$1
,
7
5
0
$4
,
4
8
0
43
4
,
1
6
7
0.
0
5
5
$0
.
0
0
1
$0
.
0
0
2
10
4
$9
4
,
5
7
2
$9
7
,
3
0
2
2,
9
0
9
,
1
6
7
5
$0
.
0
0
7
$0
.
0
0
7
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l

E
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
In
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
20
0
5
20
0
6
20
0
7
20
0
8
To
t
a
l
$3
,
4
9
7
$4
,
6
6
3
$2
6
,
8
2
3
$7
2
,
7
3
8
$1
0
7
,
7
2
1
$3
,
4
9
7
$4
,
6
6
3
$2
6
,
8
2
3
$7
2
,
7
3
8
$1
0
7
,
7
2
1
(a
)

L
e
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

C
o
s
t
s

a
r
e

b
a
s
e
d

o
n

f
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l

i
n
p
u
t
s

f
r
o
m

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
'
s

2
0
0
6

I
n
t
e
g
r
a
t
e
d

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e

P
l
a
n

a
n
d

c
a
l
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s

i
n
c
l
u
d
e

l
i
n
e

l
o
s
s

a
d
j
u
s
t
e
d

e
n
e
r
g
y

s
a
v
i
n
g
s
.
(b
)

P
r
o
g
r
a
m

L
i
f
e

B
e
n
e
f
i
t
l
C
o
s
t

R
a
t
i
o
s

a
r
e

p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d

f
o
r

a
c
t
i
v
e
,

n
o
n
-
s
t
a
t
u
t
o
r
y

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s

o
n
l
y
.
(c
)

T
h
e

T
o
t
a
l

U
t
i
l
i
t
y

C
o
s
t

i
s

a
l
l

c
o
s
t
s

i
n
c
u
r
r
e
d

b
y

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

t
o

i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t

a
n
d

m
a
n
a
g
e

a

D
S
M

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
.
(d
)

T
h
e

T
o
t
a
l

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e

C
o
s
t

i
s

t
h
e

t
o
t
a
l

e
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s

f
o
r

a

D
S
M

p
r
o
g
r
a
m

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
o
i
n
t

o
f

vi
e
w

o
f

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

a
n
d

i
t
s

c
u
s
t
o
m
e
r
s

a
s

a

1
M
0
1
e
.
(e
)

A
v
e
r
a
g
e

D
e
m
a
n
d

=

A
n
n
u
a
l

E
n
e
r
g
y

/
8
,
7
6
0

a
n
n
u
a
l

h
o
u
r
s
.
(f
)

S
u
m
m
e
r

P
e
a
k

D
e
m
a
n
d

i
s

r
e
p
o
r
t
e
d

f
o
r

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s

t
h
a
t

d
i
r
e
c
t
l
y

r
e
d
u
c
e

l
o
a
d

o
r

m
e
a
s
u
r
e

d
e
m
a
n
d

r
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
s

d
u
r
i
n
g

s
u
m
m
e
r

p
e
a
k

s
e
a
s
o
n
.
(1
6
)

R
e
s
t
a
t
e
d

f
r
o
m

$
1
1
,
1
9
0

i
n

p
r
i
o
r

r
e
p
o
r
t
.
(1
7
)

O
r
i
g
i
n
a
i
i
y

r
e
p
o
r
t
e
d

e
x
p
e
n
s
e

a
n
d

e
n
e
r
g
y

i
n
c
l
u
d
e
d

a
c
c
r
u
e
d

a
m
o
u
n
t
s
,

r
e
s
t
a
t
e
d

h
e
r
e

t
o

a
l
i
g
n

w
i
t
h

a
c
c
o
u
n
t
i
n
g

r
e
c
o
r
d
s
.
(1
8
)

M
e
a
s
u
r
e

l
i
f
e

i
s

w
e
i
g
h
t
e
d

l
i
f
e

(
b
a
s
e
d

o
n

e
n
e
r
g
y

s
a
v
i
n
g
s
)

o
f

c
u
s
t
o
m

o
p
t
i
o
n

(
1
5

y
e
a
r
s
)

a
n
d

m
e
n
u

o
p
t
i
o
n
s

(
5

y
e
a
r
s
)
.
(1
9
)

O
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
l
y

r
e
p
o
r
t
e
d

e
x
p
e
n
s
e

a
n
d

e
n
e
r
g
y

i
n
c
l
u
d
e
d

a
c
c
r
u
e
d

a
m
o
u
n
t
s
:

2
0
0
3

r
e
s
t
a
t
e
d

f
r
o
m

$
3
6
,
0
8
4
,
2
0
0
4

r
e
s
t
a
t
e
d

f
r
o
m

$
4
8
,
8
5
3
.
õ:Q)::o "U ~..()o3"'Q)::-.
o(I3 Q)
:Ja.
iena:
(I š:Q)
:J Q)
co(I3(I:J..?:
:Ji:Q)~-g;:
'"oo CX "0 Q)
co(I CDw
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

4
.

D
S
M

E
x
p
e
n
s
e

a
n
d

P
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e

2
0
0
2
-
2
0
0
8

(
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
)
Sa
v
i
n
g
s

a
n
d

D
e
m
a
n
d

R
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
Le
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

C
o
s
t
s
l
-
)
To
t
a
l

C
o
s
t
s
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
Pa
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
n
t
s
Ut
i
l
t
y

C
o
s
t
(
e
)
Co
s
t
l
d
)
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
N
e
a
r
(N
u
m
b
e
r
)
(d
o
l
l
a
r
s
)
(d
o
l
l
a
r
s
)
Di
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
y

I
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
20
0
5
$2
1
,
5
5
2
$4
3
,
9
6
9
20
0
6
$2
4
,
3
0
6
$2
4
,
3
0
6
20
0
7
$8
,
9
8
7
20
0
8
-$
1
,
9
1
3
-$
1
,
9
1
3
To
t
a
l
$5
2
,
9
3
2
$6
6
,
3
6
2
DS
M

D
i
r
e
c
t

P
r
o
g
r
a
m
Ov
e
r
h
e
a
d
20
0
7
$5
6
,
9
0
9
$5
6
,
9
0
9
20
0
8
$1
6
9
,
9
1
1
$1
6
9
,
9
1
1
To
t
a
l
$2
2
6
,
8
2
0
$2
2
6
,
8
2
0
Ot
h
e
r

C
&
R
D

a
n
d

C
R
C

B
P
A
20
0
2
$5
5
,
7
2
2
$5
5
,
7
2
2
20
0
3
$6
7
,
0
1
2
$6
7
,
0
1
2
20
0
4
$1
0
8
,
1
9
1
$1
0
8
,
1
9
1
20
0
5
$1
0
1
,
1
7
7
$1
0
1
,
1
7
7
20
0
6
$1
2
4
,
9
5
6
$1
2
4
,
9
5
6
20
0
7
$3
1
,
6
4
5
$3
1
,
6
4
5
20
0
8
$6
,
9
5
0
$6
,
9
5
0
To
t
a
l
$4
9
5
,
6
5
4
$4
9
5
,
6
5
4
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l

E
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n

I
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
20
0
5
$7
,
4
9
8
$7
,
4
9
8
20
0
6
$5
6
,
7
2
7
$5
6
,
7
2
7
20
0
7
$0
$0
20
0
8
$1
5
0
,
9
1
7
$1
5
0
,
9
1
7
To
t
a
l
$2
1
5
,
1
4
2
$2
1
5
,
1
2
Av
e
r
a
g
e
De
m
a
n
d
l
e
)
(a
M
W
)
Pe
a
k
De
m
a
n
d
(
f
)
(M
W
)
An
n
u
a
l
En
e
r
,
-
(k
W
h
)
Me
a
s
u
r
e
Li
f
e
(Y
e
a
r
s
)
To
t
a
l
Ut
i
l
i
($
/
k
W
h
)
To
t
a
l
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
($
/
k
W
h
)
Ut
i
l
t
y
Be
n
e
f
i
t
/
C
o
s
t
Ra
t
i
o
Ra
t
i
o
s
l
b
)
To
t
a
l
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
Be
n
e
f
i
t
/
C
o
s
t
Ra
t
i
o
(a
)

l
e
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

C
o
s
t
s

a
r
e

b
a
s
e
d

o
n

f
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l

i
n
p
u
t
s

f
r
o
m

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
'
s

2
0
0
6

I
n
t
e
g
r
a
t
e
d

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e

P
l
a
n

a
n
d

c
a
l
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s

i
n
c
l
u
d
e

l
i
n
e

l
o
s
s

a
d
j
u
s
t
e
d

e
n
e
r
g
y

s
a
v
i
n
g
s
.
(b
)

P
r
o
g
r
a
m

l
i
f
e

B
e
n
e
f
i
t
l
C
o
s
t

R
a
t
i
o
s

a
r
e

p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d

f
o
r

a
c
t
i
v
e
,

n
o
n
-
s
t
a
t
u
t
o
r
y

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s

o
n
l
y
.
(c
)

T
h
e

T
o
t
a
l

U
t
i
l
t
y

C
o
s
t

i
s

a
l
l

c
o
s
t
s

i
n
c
u
r
r
e
d

b
y

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

t
o

i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t

a
n
d

m
a
n
a
g
e

a

D
S
M

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
.
(d
)

T
h
e

T
o
t
a
l

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e

C
o
s
t

i
s

t
h
e

t
o
t
a
l

e
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s

f
o
r

a

D
S
M

p
r
o
g
r
a
m

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
o
i
n
t

o
f

vie
w

o
f

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

a
n
d

i
t
s

c
u
s
t
o
m
e
r
s

a
s

a

w
h
o
l
e
.
(e
)

A
v
e
r
a
g
e

D
e
m
a
n
d

=

A
n
n
u
a
l

E
n
e
r
g
y

1
8
,
7
6
0

a
n
n
u
a
l

h
o
u
r
s
.
(f
)

S
u
m
m
e
r

P
e
a
k

D
e
m
a
n
d

i
s

r
e
p
o
r
t
e
d

f
o
r

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s

t
h
a
t

d
i
r
e
c
t
l
y

r
e
d
u
c
e

l
o
a
d

o
r

m
e
a
s
u
r
e

d
e
m
a
n
d

r
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
s

d
u
r
i
n
g

s
u
m
m
e
r

p
e
a
k

s
e
a
s
o
n
.
a.Q)::o "0 ~.,()o3"0 Q)
:Jo.~"0"0(I:Ja.õ'(I(Jl"0"0(I:Ja.X'
.i
"t0)
(Q CD ee o CD3 0)::0-iena:
CD š:0)::0)
(Q CD3 CD::-5'
::c:~~"0o;:I\oo()
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

4
.

D
S
M

E
x
p
e
n
s
e

a
n
d

P
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e

2
0
0
2
-
2
0
0
8

(
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
)
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
l
Y
e
a
r
Lo
c
a
l

E
n
e
r
g
y

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
y

F
u
n
d
s
20
0
3
20
0
4
20
0
5
20
0
6
20
0
7
20
0
8
To
t
a
l
To
t
a
l

C
o
s
t
s
Sa
v
i
n
g
s

a
n
d

D
e
m
a
n
d

R
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
Le
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

C
o
s
t
s
(
'
)
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
An
n
u
a
l
Av
e
r
a
g
e
Pe
a
k
Me
a
s
u
r
e
To
t
a
l
To
t
a
l
Pa
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
n
t
s
Ut
i
l
i
t
y

C
o
s
t
(
e
)
Co
s
t
(
d
)
En
e
r
g
y
De
m
a
n
d
(
e
)
De
m
a
n
d
1
n
Li
f
e
Ut
i
l
i
t
y
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
(N
u
m
b
e
r
)
(d
o
l
l
a
r
s
)
(d
o
l
l
a
r
s
)
(k
W
h
)
(a
M
W
)
(M
W
J
(Y
e
a
r
s
)
($
/
k
W
h
)
($
/
k
W
h
)
56
$5
,
1
0
0
$5
,
1
0
0
0
$2
3
,
4
4
9
$2
3
,
4
4
9
2
$1
4
,
8
9
6
$2
6
,
7
5
6
78
,
0
0
0
0,
0
1
10
$0
,
0
2
4
$0
,
0
4
2
48
0
$3
,
4
5
9
$3
,
4
5
9
19
,
0
2
7
0,
0
0
7
$0
,
0
0
9
$0
,
0
0
9
1
$7
,
5
2
0
$7
,
5
2
0
9,
0
0
0
0.
0
0
7
$0
.
1
3
5
$0
,
1
3
5
2
$2
2
,
7
1
4
$6
0
,
1
0
0
11
5
,
9
3
1
0.
0
1
15
$0
.
0
1
9
$0
.
0
4
9
54
1
$7
7
,
1
3
8
$1
2
6
,
3
8
4
22
1
,
9
5
8
10
$0
.
0
4
3
$0
.
0
7
0
Ra
t
i
o
s
(
b
)
To
t
a
l
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
Be
n
e
f
i
/
C
o
s
t
Ra
t
i
o
Ut
i
l
t
y
Be
n
e
f
i
U
C
o
s
t
Ra
t
i
o
NE
E
A
$1
,
2
8
6
,
6
3
2
$1
,
2
8
6
,
6
3
2
13
,
2
5
1
,
6
4
4
1.
5
1
$1
,
2
9
2
,
7
4
8
$1
,
2
9
2
,
7
4
8
12
,
0
5
0
,
1
5
7
1.
3
8
$1
,
2
5
6
,
6
1
1
$1
,
2
5
6
,
6
1
1
13
,
5
4
5
,
8
9
6
1.
5
5
$4
7
6
,
8
9
1
$4
7
6
,
8
9
1
16
,
2
9
7
,
2
3
5
1.
8
6
$9
3
0
,
4
5
5
$9
3
0
,
4
5
5
22
,
3
3
7
,
4
7
7
2.
5
5
$8
9
3
,
3
4
0
$8
9
3
,
3
4
0
28
,
6
0
1
,
4
1
0
3.
2
7
$9
4
2
,
0
1
4
$9
4
2
,
0
1
4
32
,
6
7
1
,
4
6
5
3.
7
3
(2
0
)
$7
,
0
7
8
,
6
9
0
$7
,
0
7
8
,
6
9
0

1
3
8
,
7
5
5
,
2
8
3
20
0
2
20
0
3
20
0
4
20
0
5
20
0
6
20
0
7
20
0
8
To
t
a
l
--
(a
)

L
e
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

C
o
s
t
s

a
r
e

b
a
s
e
d

o
n

f
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l

i
n
p
u
t
s

f
r
o
m

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
'
s

2
0
0
6

I
n
t
e
g
r
a
t
e
d

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e

P
l
a
n

a
n
d

c
a
l
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s

i
n
c
l
u
d
e

l
i
n
e

l
o
s
s

a
d
j
u
s
t
e
d

e
n
e
r
g
y

s
a
v
i
n
g
s
.
(b
)

P
r
o
g
r
a
m

L
i
f
e

B
e
n
e
f
i
t
l
C
o
s
t

R
a
t
i
o
s

a
r
e

p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d

f
o
r

a
c
t
i
v
e
,

n
o
n
-
s
t
a
t
u
t
o
r
y

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s

o
n
l
y
.
(c
)

T
h
e

T
o
t
a
l

U
t
i
l
i
t
y

C
o
s
t

i
s

a
l
l

c
o
s
t
s

i
n
c
u
r
r
e
d

b
y

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

t
o

i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t

a
n
d

m
a
n
a
g
e

a

D
S
M

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
.
(d
)

T
h
e

T
o
t
a
l

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e

C
o
s
t

i
s

t
h
e

t
o
t
a
l

e
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s

f
o
r

a

D
S
M

p
r
o
g
r
a
m

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
o
i
n
t

o
f

vi
e
w

o
f

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

a
n
d

i
t
s

c
u
s
t
o
m
e
r
s

a
s

a

w
t
o
l
e
.
(e
)

A
v
e
r
a
g
e

D
e
m
a
n
d

=

A
n
n
u
a
l

E
n
e
r
g
y

1
8
,
7
6
0

a
n
n
u
a
l

h
o
u
r
s
.
(f
)

S
u
m
m
e
r

P
e
a
k

D
e
m
a
n
d

i
s

r
e
p
o
r
t
e
d

f
o
r

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s

t
h
a
t

d
i
r
e
c
t
l
y

r
e
d
u
c
e

l
o
a
d

o
r

m
e
a
s
u
r
e

d
e
m
a
n
d

r
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
s

d
u
r
i
n
g

s
u
m
m
e
r

p
e
a
k

s
e
a
s
o
n
.
(2
0
)

S
a
v
i
n
g
s

a
r
e

p
r
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
r
y

e
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
s

p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d

b
y

t
h
e

N
o
r
t
h
w
e
s
t

E
n
e
r
g
y

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
y

A
l
l
a
n
c
e
.
):
"0"0 CD::0-õ'CDCJl"0"0 CD::0-X'~0-0)::o "t ~..()o3"00)::o.
o(i3 Q)::0.iena:
(i~Q)::Q)
co(i3(i::..5'
::c:Q)::(i
'0o;:
'"oo00 -0 Q)
co(i (0(1
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

4
.

D
S
M

E
x
p
e
n
s
e

a
n
d

P
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e

2
0
0
2
-
2
0
0
8

(
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
)
0.
Q)::o "'~..()o3'0Q)::-.
(2
1
)
(2
1

)
):
'0'0(i::0.£.1'0'0(i::0.x'~
To
t
a
l

C
o
s
t
s
Le
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

C
o
s
t
s
l
'
)
Pr
o
g
r
a
m

L
Ra
t
i
o
s
l
h
)
To
t
a
l
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
Be
n
e
f
i
t
/
C
o
s
t
Ra
t
i
o
Sa
v
i
n
g
s

a
n
d

D
e
m
a
n
d

R
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
An
n
u
a
l
Av
e
r
a
g
e
Pe
a
k
Me
a
s
u
r
e
To
t
a
l
To
t
a
l
Pa
r
i
c
i
p
a
n
t
s
ut
i
l
i
t
y

C
o
s
t
l
e
)
Co
s
t
(
d
)
En
e
r
g
y
De
m
a
n
d
(
.
)
De
m
a
n
d
i
n
Li
f
e
Ut
i
l
i
t
y
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
(N
u
m
b
e
r
)
(d
o
l
l
a
r
s
)
(d
o
l
/
a
r
s
)
(k
W
h
)
(a
M
W
)
(M
W
)
(Y
e
a
r
s
)
($
/
k
W
h
)
($
/
k
W
h
)
20
0
2
$1
,
9
3
2
,
5
2
0
$2
,
3
6
6
,
5
9
1
17
,
1
1
7
,
2
9
4
1.
9
5
0.
0
0
20
0
3
$2
,
5
6
6
,
2
2
9
$3
,
1
1
9
,
6
0
9
18
,
7
1
2
,
9
1
9
2.
1
4
0.
0
2
20
0
4
$3
,
8
2
7
,
2
1
3
$4
,
6
8
8
,
6
3
7
19
,
4
1
9
,
6
0
5
2.
2
2
6.
5
4
20
0
5
$6
,
5
2
3
,
3
4
8
$9
,
3
5
8
,
6
2
0
37
,
8
5
3
,
0
4
6
4.
3
2
43
.
9
6
20
0
6
$1
1
,
1
7
4
,
1
8
1
$1
9
,
7
6
1
,
6
3
3
70
,
7
6
5
,
8
2
5
8.
0
8
43
.
7
2
20
0
7
$1
4
,
8
9
6
,
8
1
6
$2
5
,
2
6
9
,
3
4
3
91
,
1
4
5
,
3
5
7
10
.
4
0
57
.
0
7
20
0
8
$2
0
,
2
1
3
,
2
1
5
$4
3
,
1
7
7
,
4
2
3
14
0
,
1
5
5
,
7
6
5
15
.
9
9
72
0
3
To
t
a
l

D
i
r
e
c
t

P
r
o
g
r
a
m
$6
1
,
1
3
3
,
5
2
3
$1
0
7
,
7
4
1
,
8
5
6
39
5
,
1
6
9
,
8
1
0
-DS
M

O
v
e
r
h
e
a
d

a
n
d

O
t
h
e
r
In
d
i
r
e
c
t
Ut
i
l
i
t
y
Be
n
e
f
i
t
/
C
o
s
t
Ra
t
i
o
20
0
2
20
0
3
20
0
4
20
0
5
20
0
6
20
0
7
20
0
8
To
t
a
l
$1
2
8
,
8
5
5
-$
4
1
,
5
4
3
$1
4
2
,
3
3
7
$1
7
7
,
6
2
4
$3
0
9
,
8
3
2
$7
6
5
,
5
6
1
$9
8
0
,
3
0
5
$2
,
4
6
2
,
9
7
1
(a
)

L
e
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

C
o
s
t
s

a
r
e

b
a
s
e
d

o
n

f
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l

i
n
p
u
t
s

f
r
m

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
'
s

2
0
0
6

I
n
t
e
g
r
a
t
e
d

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e

P
l
a
n

a
n
d

c
a
l
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s

i
n
c
l
u
d
e

l
i
n
e

l
o
s
s

a
d
j
u
s
t
e
d

e
n
e
r
g
y

s
a
v
i
n
g
s
.
(b
)

P
r
o
g
r
a
m

L
i
f
e

B
e
n
e
f
i
t
l
C
o
s
t

R
a
t
i
o
s

a
r
e

p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d

f
o
r

a
c
t
i
v
e
,

n
o
n
-
s
t
a
t
u
t
o
r
y

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s

o
n
l
y
.
(c
)

T
h
e

T
o
t
a
l

U
t
i
l
i
t
y

C
o
s
t

i
s

a
l
l

c
o
s
t
s

i
n
c
u
r
r
e
d

b
y

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

t
o

i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t

a
n
d

m
a
n
a
g
e

a

D
S
M

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
.
(d
)

T
h
e

T
o
t
a
l

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e

C
o
s
t

i
s

t
h
e

t
o
t
a
l

e
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s

f
o
r

a

D
S
M

p
r
o
g
r
a
m

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
o
i
n
t

o
f

vie
w

o
f

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

a
n
d

i
t
s

c
u
s
t
o
m
e
r
s

a
s

a

w
h
o
l
e
.
(e
)

A
v
e
r
a
g
e

D
e
m
a
n
d

=

A
n
n
u
a
l

E
n
e
r
g
y

/
8
,
7
6
0

a
n
n
u
a
l

h
o
u
r
s
.
(f
)

S
u
m
m
e
r

P
e
a
k

D
e
m
a
n
d

i
s

r
e
p
o
r
t
e
d

f
o
r

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s

t
h
a
t

d
i
r
e
c
t
l
y

r
e
d
u
c
e

l
o
a
d

o
r

m
e
a
s
u
r
e

d
e
m
a
n
d

r
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
s

d
u
r
i
n
g

s
u
m
m
e
r

p
e
a
k

s
e
a
s
o
n
.
(2
1
)

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s

a
n
d

i
n
d
i
r
e
c
t

e
x
p
e
n
s
e

w
e
r
e

n
o
t

s
e
p
a
r
a
t
e
d

i
n

t
h
e

a
c
c
o
u
n
t
i
n
g

f
o
r
t
h

is

r
e
p
o
r
t
i
n
g

p
e
r
i
o
d
.
'"Ol
co CD (00)o CD3 Ol
::a.
i C/õ:
CD s:Ol
::Ol
co CD3 CD::-$'
::c:!l ~-g;:I\oo00
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

4
.

D
S
M

E
x
p
e
n
s
e

a
n
d

P
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e

2
0
0
2
-
2
0
0
8

(
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
)
To
t
a
l

C
o
s
t
s
Sa
v
i
n
g
s

a
n
d

D
e
m
a
n
d

R
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
Le
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

C
o
s
t
s
l
.
)
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
N
e
a
r
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
Co
s
t
1
d
l
(d
o
l
l
a
r
s
)
To
t
a
l
Ut
i
l
t
($
/
k
W
h
)
Av
e
r
a
g
e
De
m
a
n
d
1
e
)
(a
M
W
)
Pe
a
k
De
m
a
n
d
l
~
(M
W
)
An
n
u
a
l
En
e
r

_
.
(k
W
h
)
Me
a
s
u
r
e
Li
f
e
(Y
e
a
r
s
)
To
t
a
l

2
0
0
2
-
2
0
0
8
20
0
2
20
0
3
20
0
4
20
0
5
20
0
6
20
0
7
20
0
8
To
t
a
l
$2
,
0
6
1
,
3
7
5
$2
,
5
2
4
,
6
8
6
$3
,
9
6
9
,
5
5
0
$6
,
7
0
0
,
9
7
2
$1
1
,
4
8
,
0
1
3
$1
5
,
6
6
2
,
3
7
7
$2
1
,
1
9
3
,
5
2
0
$6
3
,
5
9
6
,
4
9
4
To
t
a
l
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
($
/
k
W
h
)
Ut
i
l
i
t
y
Be
n
e
f
i
t
/
C
o
s
t
Ra
t
i
o
Ra
t
i
o
s
1
b
l
To
t
a
l
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
Be
n
e
f
i
t
C
o
s
t
Ra
t
i
o
(a
)

L
e
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

C
o
s
t
s

a
r
e

b
a
s
e
d

o
n

f
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l

i
n
p
u
t
s

f
r
o
m

I
d
a
h
o

P
O
l
l
r
'
s

2
0
0
6

I
n
t
e
g
r
a
t
e
d

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e

P
l
a
n

a
n
d

c
a
l
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s

i
n
c
l
u
d
e

l
i
n
e

l
o
s
s

a
d
j
u
s
t
e
d

e
n
e
r
g
y

s
a
v
i
n
g
s
.
(b
)

P
r
o
g
r
a
m

L
i
f
e

B
e
n
e
f
i
/
C
o
s
t

R
a
t
i
o
s

a
r
e

p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d

f
o
r

a
c
t
i
v
e
,

n
o
n
-
s
t
a
t
u
t
o
r
y

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s

o
n
l
y
.
(c
)

T
h
e

T
o
t
a
l

U
t
i
l
i
t
y

C
o
s
t

i
s

a
l
l

c
o
s
t
s

i
n
c
u
r
r
e
d

b
y

I
d
a
h
o

P
O
l
l
r

t
o

i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t

a
n
d

m
a
n
a
g
e

a

D
S
M

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
.
(d
)

T
h
e

T
o
t
a
l

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e

C
o
s
t

i
s

t
h
e

t
o
t
a
l

e
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s

f
o
r

a

D
S
M

p
r
o
g
r
a
m

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
o
i
n
t

o
f
v
i
e
w

o
f

I
d
a
h
o

P
O
l
l
r

a
n
d

i
t
s

c
u
s
t
o
m
e
r
s

a
s

a

w
t
o
l
e
.
(e
)

A
v
e
r
a
g
e

D
e
m
a
n
d

=

A
n
n
u
a
l

E
n
e
r
g
y

/
8
,
7
6
0

a
n
n
u
a
l

h
o
u
r
s
.
(f
)

S
u
m
m
e
r

P
e
a
k

D
e
m
a
n
d

i
s

r
e
p
o
r
t
e
d

f
o
r

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s

t
h
a
t

d
i
r
e
c
t
l
y

r
e
d
u
c
e

l
o
a
d

o
r

m
e
a
s
u
r
e

d
e
m
a
n
d

r
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
s

d
u
n
n
g

s
u
m
m
e
r

p
e
a
k

s
e
a
s
o
n
.
~"0"0 CD::a.
()
"
CD 1"0"0 CD::a.x.
.¡a.Ol:ro '"~..()o3"0 Ol
::-.