HomeMy WebLinkAbout20030205 Final Report.pdf.,
:l.
IDAHO POWER COMPANf\ E: C E ! 'if E 0
O. BOX 70 \~'
; \
r:
BOISE, IDAHO 83707
' ,-- ,,
r,rfi') r:r:p nt
" \
LUGJ \ ~_:; H,' L
ill
An IDACORP Company
MAGGIE BRILZ
, '~: . , ';', ",,'
J !,""
UTili; ;l::.:.J Cv;,ii3SiOti
.(;
(208) 388-2848
FAX (208) 388-6449
mbrilz (g) idahopower.com
Director, Pricing
February 4, 2003
Ms. Jean D. Jewell, Secretary
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
P. O. Box 83720
Boise , 10 83720-0074
/fJc/;:-tJ/-
RE:Final Report regarding the
Irrigation Service Time-ot-Use Pilot Program
Per Order No. 28706
Dear Ms. Jewell:
The Commission s Order No. 28706 approving the Company Irrigation
Service Time-ot-Use Pilot Program directed Idaho Power to report to the commission
regarding the operation ot the program and its results. Enclosed are seven copies ot the
Company s final report on the two-year Pilot Program. It you have any questions, please
feel tree to contact me.
Sincerely,
?/)~
A5
Maggie Brilz
MB:mb
Enclosure
Ric Gale
:'It:" rf.7 I \frr\,-",,-~, ~l/,;.
FILED
\,,,.,"" '~""
' H
" ',.. ", -
,. u."-'.I ,-!J
' ,
An IDACORP company
--'
1),oGI,Ll ij~;) L~.;.:.,)lOn
",,",~~"--,. ,
IRRIGATION SERVICE
TIME-OF-USE PILOT PROGRAM
Final Report
February 4 , 2003
Background
On February 21 , 2001 Idaho Power Company filed with the Idaho Public Utilities
Commission a request to implement a Time-of-Use Pilot Program to allow irrigation customers
to take electric service at time-of-use energy rates under Schedule 25, Irrigation Service
Optional Time-of-Use Pilot Program. The Pilot Program was one of several steps taken by the
Company during the Western Energy Crisis which targeted load reduction. The purpose of the
Pilot Program was to provide Idaho Power, the customers of Idaho Power, and the
Commission with the information necessary to evaluate the impacts and benefits of time-of-use
(TOU) pricing of electric service for irrigation customers.
The major provisions of the Pilot Program , which was approved by the Commission in
Order No. 28706, are:
. The irrigation season is defined by fixed dates rather than by meter reading dates and is
the time period June 1 through September 30.
Three time-of-use periods are defined during the irrigation season. They are:
Mid-Peak
On-Peak
Off-Peak
9:00 am - 1 :00 pm
1 :00 pm - 9:00
9:00 pm - 9:00
These time periods are utilized throughout each day of the irrigation season , including
weekends and holidays.
. The base energy rates for the three time-of-use periods are:
Mid-Peak
On-Peak
Off-Peak
8416 cents/kWh
9728 cents/kWh
1 .4208 cents/kWh
The base energy rate for usage outside of the irrigation season is the same as the out-
of-season base energy rate for the Company s standard irrigation service, Schedule 24.
The in-season mid-peak base energy rate is the same energy rate as for in-season
energy use under the Company s standard irrigation service , Schedule 24.
Enrollment in the Pilot Program is limited to 300 metered service points.
The Pilot Program is not available to new participants after October 1 , 2002. However
customers enrolled in the Program on that date may voluntarily continue to receive
irrigation service under Schedule 25 for their enrolled metered service points until
October 1 , 2007.
Two-Year Pilot Participation Results
The two-year data gathering period for the Pilot Program has concluded and the
Company is reporting to the Commission its information regarding the Program and its results.
The Company has reviewed the usage information available for the Pilot Program participants
for the 2001 and 2002 irrigation seasons. In addition , the Company has reviewed the market
price data for the months of June through September for 2001 and 2002 , in order determine
what, if any, impact on purchase power expenses the Pilot Program may have had.
Number of Participants
During the 2001 irrigation season , 180 metered service points were enrolled in the Pilot
Program. In August 2001 a letter was sent to each participant explaining that all metered
service points currently enrolled in the Pilot Program would automatically continue to be
enrolled for the 2002 irrigation season unless the customer specifically requested a service
point be removed from the Pilot Program. Of those original 180 metered service points , 21
chose to be removed from the Pilot Program.
Customers that chose to remove service points from the Pilot Program did so for a
variety of reasons. However, the primary reasons claimed were because (1) of changes in
crops for which irrigating around the time-of-use blocks was not compatible, or (2) the benefits
associated with bill impacts of the time-of-use pricing did not warrant the necessary operational
changes.
One of the reasons given by the participants for beginning or continuing participation in
the Pilot Program was the speculation there could be a wet spring accompanied by a cool
summer that would allow taking advantage of scheduling irrigation usage around the most
advantageous time-of-use blocks. The Company is aware of approximately 11 participants
who made capital investments that improved their utilization of a time-of-use option. However
it is not clear how many of those investments would still have been made even without the
Program s inducements. Still others felt they could benefit from TOU rates in a year they
would only be irrigating a portion of the land and thereby would not have to operate a pump as
they normally would.
During the 2002 irrigation season , 228 metered service points were enrolled in the Pilot
Program: 159 carried forward from 2001 plus 69 new enrollments.
Purchase Power Costs
Market energy prices in irrigation year 2000 were extremely high. These high prices
continued into the winter of 2000 - 2001. There were some instances when the average MWh
monthly Mid-Columbia price was over $280. The Pilot Program , which was designed during
this period of high market prices, was intended to reduce costs to both the Company and its
customers. The large variance between on-peak and off-peak market prices during 2000 and
early 2001 enabled the Company to cost justify a 50% discount from the standard irrigation
rate to encourage customers to shift energy usage to off-peak time periods. In contrast to the
market prices of 2000 and early 2001 , the market prices during the 2001 and 2002 irrigation
seasons were not as high nor were the variances between on-peak and off-peak prices as
great.
Irrigation Irrigation Irrigation Summer 2003-2007
Year 2000 Year 2001 Year 2002 Forward Mid-
Average Price (per MWh):
On-Peak 171.52.4 17.42.4
Mid-Peak 122.44.17.41.
Off-Peak 84.38.12.29.
24-Hr Average 119.43.15.35.
On/Off Differential 86.14.12.
Looking ahead, the summer 2003-2007 Mid-Columbia forward prices have an estimated
on-peak and off-peak average MWh price of $42.42 and $29.93, respectively. Therefore, the
summer 2003-2007 average prices and differential between average on-peak and off-peak
prices are expected to remain relatively low.
Load Shifting
The typical energy usage pattern for all irrigation customers in 1999 and 2000 during
the time-of-use time periods established for the Pilot Program was:
On-Peak
Mid-Peak
Off-Peak
34%
17%
49%
Even though the Company has no specific time-of-use information on the Pilot Program
participants prior to their participation in the Pilot Program , it is assumed their usage was
typical of the irrigation class as a whole. If this assumption is correct , Pilot Program
participants did shift their energy usage from the on-peak to the off-peak period during the
2001 and 2002 irrigation seasons. The shift in usage from the on-peak to the off-peak period
however, was less during the second year of the Pilot Program than during the first year of the-
Pilot Program.
On-Peak
Mid-Peak
Off-Peak
2001
Usaqe
23.
17.4%
59.
% Shift
(11 %)
11%
2002
Usaqe
27.
15.
56.
% Shift
(7%)
(1%)
The 2001 irrigation time-of-use total energy usage was 28,295,648 kWh. The 2002
irrigation time-of-use total energy usage was 70 569,448 kWh. If the previous years' usage
ratios for the time-of-use periods were applied to the total actual 2001 and 2002 participant
usage, it would indicate the following energy shifting tendency:
2001 2002
kWh Allocated kWh Allocated
By Typical Actual TOU By Typical Actual TOU
Usa e Ratios kWh Usa e Ratios kWh
On Peak 620,520 517,456 23,993,612 19,479,929
Mid-Peak 810 260 912 744 996 806 11 ,124 807
Off-Peak 13,864,868 16,865,448 34,579,030 39.964,712
Total 28,295 648 295 648 569,448 569,448
Purchase Power Cost Savings
For the 2001 irrigation year, purchase power costs for participating Pilot Program
customers are estimated to be $1 272 092 based on hourly market energy prices 1 for June
through September 2001. If the Pilot Program participants had maintained their typical usage
pattern, the purchase power costs would have been approximately $1 320,781 , again based
on the hourly market energy prices for 2001. Therefore shifting energy usage from higher-cost
to lower-cost time periods reduced purchase power costs during the 2001 irrigation season by
approximately $48 689.
For the 2002 irrigation year, purchase power costs for participating Pilot Program
customers are estimated to be $965 917 based on hourly market energy prices for June
through September 2002. If the Pilot Program participants had maintained their typical usage
pattern , the purchase power costs would have been approximately $991 878. Therefore
shifting energy usage from higher-cost to lower-cost time periods reduced purchase power
costs during the 2002 irrigation season by approximately $25 962.
Purchased Power Costs
Typical Usage Pattern
Time-of-Use Usage Pattern
Reduced Purchased Power Costs
2001
320 781
272,092
$ 48,689
2002
$991 878
965,917
$ 25,962
Pilot Program Energy Charges
In 2001 , the energy charges for Pilot Program participants during the June through
September in-season period were $703 325. If the Pilot Program customers had been
charged the same flat rate as other non-participating irrigation consumers during this same
time period, energy charges would have been $804 049. Shifting energy from the on-peak
period to the off-peak period resulted in reduced billings to Pilot Program participants totaling
$100 724. Correspondingly, the Company s revenues were also decreased $100,724.
1 Hourly prices were established by using actual Idaho Power Company hourly real-time transaction price data
supplemented by Mid C hourly or hlh (heavy load hours)/lih (light load hours) data for hours during which Idaho
Power transactions did not take place. The price for each hour of the month was indexed to the monthly average
and then the average index for each of the twenty-four hours was computed. A monthly average price in dollars
per MWh , weighted by hours of peak and off-peak, was calculated. This single monthly price was then multiplied
by the ratio for each hour creating an hourly price curve for each month.
In 2002, the energy charges for Pilot Program participants during the June through
September in-season period were $1 852 639. If the Pilot Program customers had been
charged the same flat rate as other non-participating irrigation consumers during this same
time period, energy charges would have been $2 005 301. Shifting energy from the on-peak
period to the off-peak period resulted in reduced billings to Pilot Program participants totaling
$152 662. Correspondingly, the Company s revenues were also decreased $152 662.
Energy Charges
Flat I rrigation Rates
Time-of-Use Rates
Reduced Energy Bills
2001
$804 049
703.325
$100,724
2002
005,301
1 .852.639
$ 152 662
TOU Pilot Program Benefits (Losses)
The real benefit from time-of-use programs is the reduction in purchase power costs
that result when usage is shifted from a higher-price to a lower-price time period. Sustained
cost reductions will lead to a reduced revenue requirement and , correspondingly, the cost
savings will flow through to the Company s customers. The Commission also anticipated
these fundamental TOU benefits when it authorized the Pilot Program in Order No. 28706
which stated
, "
Creating a time of use service offering results in customers paying for usage at
rates that more closely match the cost of providing service.
However, as the data above illustrates, there is a mismatch under the current Program
structure between the customers' bill reductions and the corresponding reduction in purchase
power costs. The Pilot Program reduced purchase power costs in 2001 and 2002 by
approximately $48 689 and $25 962 , respectively. Therefore it is apparent the customers' bill
reductions in 2001 and 2002 of $100,724 and $152 662 is clearly linked to the rate desiqn , not
the actual cost savings.
Under the current time-of-use rate structure , reduced customer bills have exceeded
reduced costs each year. Because of this mismatch, the Company s revenue requirement was
not reduced; it became greater.
Individual Customer Impacts
In order to benefit from the Pilot Program , it is necessary for a Customer with a typical
irrigation load pattern to shift usage from a higher-price time period to a lower-price time
period. Unless a Customer s original usage pattern was already skewed to lower-price time
periods and maintained throughout their participation in the Pilot, simply enrolling in the Pilot
Program would not guarantee benefits.
Comparing the energy charges the Customers would have paid if they had been billed
the Company s regular (non-TOU) irrigation rates , the impacts on the self-selected , voluntary
Pilot Program participants were as follows:
Negative (TOU kWh Bills Larger)
No Impact
Positive (TOU kWh Bills Smaller)
2001
34 18.1 0.
145 80.
2002
66 28.2 0.
160 70.
Among those Customers receiving a positive energy charge benefit, the range of the
energy benefits are further subdivided as follows:
Less than $1 00
$101 - $500
$501 - $1000
Above $1 000
2001
17.
34.4%
16.
11.
2002
25.
23.
10.
11.
The above analysis is a comparison of the benefits/losses related to TOU energy
charges, exclusively. Only two participants appear to have increased their kW demand in
order to take advantage of TOU energy pricing. However, if any increased demands or the
TOU metering charges were included in the analysis , the financial benefits to Pilot Program
participants would be smaller.
Summary
The goal of time-of-use pricing is to reduce overall costs to Idaho Power Company and
its customers by shifting usage from higher-cost time periods to lower-cost time periods. While
the Company s Irrigation Time-of-Use Pilot Program was successful in shifting some load to
lower-cost time periods, the reduction in overall power supply costs was modest.
The current rate design results in reduced customer bills which exceed reduced
purchased power costs. Without fundamental changes to the rate design , the principal results
of the time-of-use program are:
Only time-of-use participants have the potential to benefit
. The Company s revenue requirement is increasing since the bill reductions to
customers are greater than the reduction in power supply costs
Future bills to all customers (both participating and non-participating) will
increase
In order to align the reduced bill benefits to customers with the reduction in power
supply costs such that the Company s overall revenue requirement does not increase , the
Company intends to file with the Commission a revision to the pricing under Schedule 25. The
proposed pricing will be consistent with expected market prices and will strive to match
expected cost reductions with customer bill reduction benefits.
In its Reply Comments in Case No. IPC-02-12 (the investigation of time-of-use pricing
for Idaho Power residential customers), the Company clearly stated its intent to pursue the
implementation of an automated meter reading (AMR) system in the near future. Utilization of
an AMR system enables a much more efficient means for offering time-based pricing than
does a standard meter reading system. The Company believes it is reasonable to limit
participation in time-of-use pricing for irrigation service to those customers who were enrolled
in the Pilot Program as of October 1 , 2002 and who choose to continue their participation.
Information obtained from customers who choose to continue their participation in time-of-use
pricing, particularly with prices that match customer benefits with cost reductions, will be
valuable in assessing further steps related to time-of-use pricing. In addition, limiting
participation to those metered service points operated by current Pilot Program customers will
avoid additional investment in standard time-of-use meters.