20091202Report for 2009.pdf

1SIDA~POR~
An IDACORP Company
SCOTT D. SPARS
Senior Priing Analyt
sspaahopower.com
-;.~
December 1 , 2009
Ms. Jean D. Jewell, Secretary
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
P.O. Box 83720
Boise, 10 83720-0074
RE: 2009 Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report
Dear Ms. Jewell:
Enclosed please find eight copies of Idaho Power Company's Irrigation Peak
Rewards Program Report for 2009 filed in compliance with Order No. 30194. If you have
any questions regarding the content of the report, please direct them to Pete Pengilly at
208-388-2281 or feel free to contact me at 208-388-2742.
Sincerely,~7 -"
Scott Sparks
SDS:ma
cc: Ric Gale
Greg Said
Tim Tatum
Mike Youngblood
Pete Pengilly
P&RS/Legal Files
P.O. Box 70 (83707)
1221 W. Idaho St.
Boise, 10 83702
*fIDA~POQÐ
An IDACORP Company
j; C- - E- ~o6 - .. :L
Irrigation Peak Rewards
Program Report
December 1, 2009
iÇ 2009 Idaho Power
Idaho Power
Table of Contents
Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................. i
List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. ii
List of Figues ................................................................................................................................. ii
Executive Summar......................................................................................................................... i
Summary of Program Results..........................................................................................................2
Program Details .........................................................................................................................2
Timer Option........................................................................................................................2
Dispatch Option...................................................................................................................3
Program Incentives ..............................................................................................................4
Program Opt-out ..................................................................................................................4
Review of Program Results .............................................................................................................5
Participation................................................................................................................. .......... ....5
Operations ..................................................................................................................................8
Equipment and Monitoring ..................................................................................................8
Timer Option..................................................................................................................8
Dispatch Option .............................................................................................................8
Program Analysis...........................................................................................................................l 0
Load Reduction Analysis.........................................................................................................l 0
Load Research Analysis-Timer Option...........................................................................ll
Load Research Analysis-Manual Dispatch Option...................................................... ...12
Load Research Analysis-Automatic Dispatch Option ....................................................13
M2M Communications Device Analysis-Automatic Dispatch Option........................... 14
Substation Data Analysis ............. ......................................................................................15
System Load Data Analysis ........................................... ....................................................16
Load Reduction Achieved...................................................................................................... ..19
Cost-Effectiveness .........................................................................................................................21
Program Costs..................................................................................................... .................... .21
Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report Pagei
Idaho Power
Benefit-Cost Analysis ..............................................................................................................21
Customer Satisfaction Survey Results......................................................................................... ..22
Conclusions........................................................ ...................................... ..................................... .25
Table 1.
Table 2.
Table 3.
Table 4.
Table 5.
List of Tables
Option incentives. ....................................................................................................4
Service points by area. ............................................................................................. 7
Dispatch and Timer Options interrption distrbution by service point. .................7
Status of automatic control devices durng dispatch events. .................................10
Realization rates by period for Timer Option paricipants. ................................. ..12
Table 6. Realized rate of automatic devices that tued off durng load control
dispatch events. .......................................................................................................................... .15
Table 7. Enrolled biling demand by region (kW). ..............................................................20
Table 8. Realization rates used for program options. ..........................................................20
Table 9. Total program daily MW reduction using realization rates. ..................................21
Table 10. Anual program costs. ...........................................................................................21
Table 11. Benefit-cost model inputs. .....................................................................................22
List of Figures
Figure 1. Idaho Power service areas. .......................................................................................6
Figure 2. Distrbution of paricipants. .....................................................................................6
Figure 3. Average metered demand (kW) Timer Option. .....................................................11
Figure 4. Average metered demand (kW) Manual Dispatch Option. ...................................12
Figure 5. Average metered demand (kW) Dispatch Option for July 2, 16, and 17...............13
Figure 6. Average metered demand (kW) Dispatch Option for July 22,23, and 27.............14
Figure 7. Load data from a particular substation in the Eastern area on July 16. .................15
Page ii Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report
Idaho Power
Figure 8. Total system load on July 16. ................................................................................16
Figure 9. Demand response impact on Idaho Power system firm load. ................................17
Figure 10. Demand response program impact on system load early- to mid-July. .................18
Figure 11. Demand response programs impact on system load late July................................ 19
Figure 12. Overall satisfaction with Irgation Peak Rewards program................................ ..23
Figure 13. Approximate percent of acres irrgated by pumps by crop. ...................................23
Figure 14. Information provided by the electrcian.................................................................24
Figurè 15. Likelihood to participate in the Irgation Peak Rewards program in the
futue. ................................................................................................................................24
Figure 16. Barrers to participating in the Irgation Peak Rewards program in the
futue. ................................................................................................................................25
Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report Page iii
Idaho Power
This page left blank intentionally.
Page iv Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report
Idaho Power
Executive Summary
The Irgation Peak Rewards program (the program) is a voluntar demand response program
that has been available to Idaho Power's agrcultural irrgation customers since 2004.
The program is designed to reduce peak load by turning off participating irrgation pumps durng
peak demand hours through the irrgation season in return for a financial incentive. Through
this program, Idaho Power has been successful in reducing load during the sumer afternoon
hours, which are the hours that are drving Idaho Power's need for new resources.
A major change in the demand response program occured in 2009. This change expanded
the dispatch capability of Idaho Power to reduce system demand during critical summer peak
load events. The Irrgation Peak Rewards program, originally identified as a resource in 2004,
was transitioned to act primarily as a direct load control or dispatch program. In prior years,
demand reduction through the program was controlled only with programmed timers that
provided demand reduction from irrgation pumping systems from 4:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. on
weekdays in June, July, and August. Options added to the program in 2009 allowed direct load
control or dispatch capabilities to match demand response resources with actual system peaks.
The change in the program has increased the programs peaking resource capacity from its
previous range of 34 to 37 megawatt (MW) to a forecasted impact of 260 MW at program
matuty in 2012. Actual demand reductions from the revised program wil depend on the level
of irrgation customer participation and Idaho Power need.
This report provides the Idaho Public Utilities Commission (IPUC) with the 2009 operational
results of the Irgation Peak Rewards program, and is fied in compliance with IPUC Order
No. 30194. The operational results presented in this document represent a review ofthe
program's performance in 2009 on a system-wide basis.
The redesigned Irrgation Peak Rewards program was introduced at the October 2, 2008, Energy
Efficiency Advisory Group (EEAG) meeting. Members of EEAG represent a cross-section of
customer interests, including residential, industral, commercial, and agricultuaL. IPUC staff are
also members of the EEAG. Idaho Power proposed that the Irgation Peak Rewards program
include a dispatch demand response option offered to Idaho Power customers in Idaho and
Oregon. Three options would be available for customers to choose between: 1) the Timer Option,
2) an Automatic Dispatch Option that allows Idaho Power to remotely turn paricipants' pumps
on or off, or 3) a Manual Dispatch OptioJ" for large service location with 1,000 horsepower (Hp)
or greater option that allows paricipating customers, after being notified by Idaho Power, to tu
pumps off manually during summer peak hours.
Based on the success of the current Irrgation Peak Rewards program and the potential for
substantially increased cost-effective, peak-demand reduction, the EEAG recommended that
Idaho Power expand the program. Throughout 2008, Idaho Power researched various equipment,
options, and costs for dispatch equipment for use on irrgation pumps.
The Irrgation Peak Rewards program, which included the dispatch demand response option, was
filed with the IPUC on November 10,2008, and approved by the IPUC on January 14,2009.
The program was approved in Oregon by the Public Utility Commission of Oregon (OPUC) on
February 25,2009. Idaho Power offered the program to all agricultual customers receiving
Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report Page 1
Idaho Power Company
service under Irgation Rate Schedule 24 in 2009. Throughout 2009, Idaho Power continued to
share program information and progress with EEAG members through program updates.
Details on the approved Irrgation Peak Rewards program changes are listed as part of Case
No. IPC-E-08-23 on the IPUC Web site, and are identified as Schedule 23 in both Idao
and Oregon.
Summary of Program Results
The following items summarze the key results of the program on a system-wide basis:
· In 2009, the program achieved a maximum peak load reduction of 160 MW.
· Three hundred seventy-four (374) customers, or 6% ofthe 6,379 eligible customers,
chose to participate in the program.
· One thousand five hundred and twelve (1,512), or 8.6%, of the 17,621 eligible metered
service points were enrolled in the program.
· Ofthe 1,512 enrolled service points, 382 were enrolled in the Timer Option, and
1,130 were enrolled in the Dispatch Option.
· The program achieved a total billng demand enrollment of 30 1 ,839 kilowatts (kW),
of which 58,057 kW were enrolled in the Timer Option and 243,782 kW were enrolled in
the Dispatch Option.
· The program costs as of October 31,2009 were $9,636,796.
· Results show a 20-year average benefit cost (B/C) ratio of 1.54.
· Customer Satisfaction Survey results indicated that almost 90% of the responding
participants were satisfied with the program.
Program Details
Timer Option
The pre-programmed Timer Option, offered previously, was made available to all irrgation
customers. Installation fees between $250 and $500 were applied to paricipating service
locations less than 75 Hp.
· Customers could choose to have all irrgation pumps on a single metered service point
tued off on one, two, or three weekdays per week.
Page 2 Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report
Idaho Power
. Idaho Power determined the specific weekday or weekdays to schedule the interrption
of all pumps at each service point.
· Interrptions occurred from 4 p.m. to 8 p.m.
Dispatch Option
The Dispatch Option allowed Idaho Power to initiate load control events that prevented pumps
from operating at participating metered service points. Installation fees between $500 and $1,000
applied to participating service points less than 30 Hp. Customers could participate in one of
thee ways:
· Have a one-way communication device installed that allowed Idaho Power to control all
the customer's pumps at a single metered service point.
· Have a two-way communication device installed that allowed both Idao Power and
the customer to control all the pumps at a single service point.
· Service points with multiple pumps and over i ,000 cumulative Hp were eligible to
participate as a Large Service Location. Customers under this classification could choose
to manually control which pumps were controlled durng a load control event.
The parameters of the Dispatch Option, which limits the impact on customers, include the
following:
. Idaho Power wil initiate control (dispatch) events on a customized M2M
Communications Web site.
· Dispatch load control events can occur any weekday, excluding July 4, between the hours
of 2 p.m. and 8 p.m.
· Load control events can occur up to 4 hours per day and up to 15 hours per week, but no
more than 60 hours per program season.
· Idaho Power wil give notice by 4 p.m. the day prior to the initiation of a control event.
· If prior notice of a load control event has been sent, Idaho Power may choose to cancel
the event by 1 :30 p.m. on the scheduled day of the event.
· Idaho Power wil give 30 minutes notice prior to start of all actual events and prior to
the end of all actual events.
· The provisions for this program wil not apply for any time Idaho Power interrpts
the customer's load for a system emergency or any other time that a customer's service is
interrpted by events outside the control of Idaho Power.
Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report Page 3
Idaho Power Company
Program Incentives
A customer's incentive appeared as a bil credit that sumed the demand credit and energy
credit applied to a customer's monthly bils for the calendar months of June and July.
The demand credit is calculated by multiplying the monthly billng kW by the demand-related
incentive amount for the interrption option selected by the customer. The energy credit is
calculated by multiplying the monthly biling kilowatt-hour (kWh) usage by the energy-related
incentive amount for the interrption option selected by the customer. Incentives offered are
listed in Table 1.
Table 1. Option incentives.
Option
Demand Credit
($ per billng kW)
Energy Credit
($ per biling kWh)
One Weekday
Two Weekdays
Three Weekdays
$3.15
$4.65
$4.65
plus
plus
$0.002
$0.007
$4.65 plus $0.031
All customer incentives participating in the Timer or Dispatch options are calculated using
Idaho Power meter biling data. Idaho Power's Customer Information System (CIS) calculates
the bil credits through contract riders. Installation fees and incentives for service points
classified as Large Service Locations are completed through manual adjustments using interval
meter data.
Program enrollment for 2009 was 1,512 service points across five geographic regions of
Idaho Power's Idaho and Oregon service areas. Approximately 6,379 customers operated
the 17,621 eligible service points. There were 750 potential Oregon customers and
5,629 potential Idaho customers.
Program Opt-out
Durng the 2009 irrgation season, one service point participant in the Timer Option and
one service point paricipant in the Dispatch Option requested removal from the program.
Both requests occured after June 15. Under the program, if a service point is taken out of
the Program after June 15, the participant is assessed a fee. The fee for each service point
removed is $100 for the Timer Option and $500 for the Dispatch Option. This resulted in a total
of $600, credited to the Energy Effciency Rider (Rider) fuding account to offset the initial
program costs.
Under the rules of the Dispatch Option, participants have the ability to opt-out of dispatch events
five times per service point. Each opt-out incurs a fee of $0.005 per kWh based in the curent
month's biling kWh, which may be prorated to correspond with the dates of program operation.
Page 4 Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report
Idaho Power
During the 2009 irrgation season, 24 services points opted out 38 times. These penalties were
also credited to the Rider account.
Review of Program Results
Participation
Durng winter 2009, Idaho Power began program marketing strategies. Ten program workshops
were sponsored across Idaho Power's service area, and Idaho Power staff participated in
five agriculture shows. New program offerings were presented, and demonstrations of the new
dispatch demand response option were provided.
In February 2009, over 6,000 customer mailings were sent to all eligible Idaho Power irrgation
customers. The mailing included a program explanation, a program application, the program's
incentive strctue, a listing of the customer's eligible service points, and a potential incentive
estimate for each program option based on the customer's 2008 usage. Additionally, one-on-one
training with Idaho Power agricultue representatives familiarzed customers with the new
technology and program details.
Idaho Power experienced great interest in the program and installed all of the available control
devices, which totaled 1,274 by the end of the season. Program participation exceeded
the number of available devices. After July 31, 2009, when more devices became available,
51 additional devices were installed for customers desiring to paricipate in the program in 2010.
Figure 1 portays Idaho Power's service area divided into five regional areas-Western, Canyon,
Capital, Southern, and Eastern. These areas are used throughout this report in reference to
program information.
Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report Page 5
Idaho Power Company
Figure 1. Idaho Power service areas.
Figue 2 represents the 374 irrgation customers that operated the enrolled service points in
the program and their distrbution by Idaho Power's regional service areas.
Figure 2. Distribution of participants.
Program Participation by Area
Western
9%Canyon
6%Capital
14%
Eastern
34%Southern
37%
Page 6 Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report
Idaho Power
Table 2 lists the total number of eligible service points and the participation levels by area.
Table 2. Service points by area.
Idaho Power Area Eligible Service Points
3,249
Service Points Enrolled
Enrolled
Percentage by
Area
Western
Capital 1,584
62
0(a)=50 T(b)=12
75
0=70 T=5
148
0=129 T=19
263
0=223 T=40
301
0=242 T=59
663
0=416 T=247
1,512
1.9%
Canyon 2,307 3.3%
9.3%
Southern Twin Falls 4,975 5.3%
Mini-Cassia 2,221 13.6%
Eastern 3,285 20.2%
Total Service Points
(a) D= Enrolled in Dispatch Option
(b) T= Enrolled in Timer Option
17,621 8.6%
Table 3 compares how the 1,512 participating service points were distrbuted among the different
program options across Idaho Power's service area.
Table 3.Dispatch and Timer Options interruption distribution by service point.
Dispatch Option Timer Option
Interrupt Interrupt Interrupt
Option 1 Option 2 Option 3
Idaho Power Area Automatic Manuai(a)Dispatch 1 2 3 Total
Device Total DaysIWeek DaysIWeek DaysIWeek Timers
Western 50 0 50 1 1 10 12
Canyon 66 4 70 1 2 2 5
Capital 111 18 129 15 1 3 19
Southern Twin Falls 220 3 223 12 19 9 40
Mini-Cassia 242 0 242 50 2 7 59
Eastern 416 0 416 105 102 40 247
Total Service Points 1,105 25 1,130 184 127 71 382
(atarge service locations (~1000 Hp) selecting manual control.
Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report Page?
Idaho Power Company
Operations
Equipment and Monitoring
Timer Option
Electronic timers manufactued by Grasslin Controls Corp. (Model GMX-891-0-24) were used
to interrpt power to customers' pumps during the interrption period. The timers were installed
in the pump motor control circuit to prevent the pump from ruing durng the interrption
period.
To meet the load reduction targets of the program, Idaho Power tres to minimize interrption
failures. Most of the electronic timers operated without incident with 21 (5.5%) of service points
needing a follow-up visit by a contract electrcian to resolve a problem prior to the program start
date on June 15,2009. All 382 service points participating in the Timer Option were checked and
re-programmed for the 2009 irrgation season. While each known timer problem was resolved,
a review of Idaho Power's load research data shows some issues went undetected and uneported
by customers. These failures were due to mechanical and electrcal problems. Idaho Power
continues to address these issues through equipment monitoring and site visits.
Dispatch Option
M2M Communications was selected as the equipment provider, based on having the best
equipment for the lowest price of the options Idaho Power researched. Curently, Idaho Power
buys the equipment from M2M Communications and pays to have it installed on Idao Power
customers' pump panels.
Irgation Load Control, LLC (ILC) formed as a joint ventue between M2M Communications
and Sparan Energy Control Systems to provide installation and service for Idaho Power.
ILC's managing parers have a record of accomplishment of working together and have
successfully implemented the Rocky Mountain Power Irrgation demand response program
in 2008. Idaho Power initiates Irrgation Peak Rewards dispatch control events on a customized
M2M Communications' Web site.
A Web-to-wireless remote control system, developed by M2M Communications utilized the
LoadstariI Model MI0lcontrol device installed in customers' pump motor control circuit to tu
off or prevent the pump from ruing durng an interrption event. This equipment provided
remote cellular communication or remote satellte communication. The Web service allowed
Idaho Power to dispatch interrption events on the days Idao Power determined to be system
peak days. Two-way communication from the device provided the feedback used by
Idaho Power to determine the status of the customers' equipment surounding an interrption
event. Customers had the option of using the equipment for their own management puroses
outside of interrption events and received a detailed user's guide.
The combination ofM2M utilization of new hardware, softare, and communications
equipment, in addition to Idaho Power launching a new dispatch option, resulted in challenges
described below. Idaho Power responded to the emerging challenges by working closely with
Page 8 Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report
Idaho Power
M2M to correct concerns in preparation for the 2010 season. No additional costs to the Rider or
Idaho Power were incured because of the solutions.
The Irgation Peak Rewards dispatch load control system experienced a number of different
issues that affected Idaho Power's ability to fully realize its load-shedding potentiaL.
The system experienced highly inconsistent performance from load control devices equipped
with satellte network communications. In spring 2009, the satellte company experienced
problems properly placing a group of newly deployed communications satelltes into their
intended orbits. These problems resulted in the satelltes operating on reduced power,
which introduced gaps in coverage during which the dispatch load control devices could not
communicate with any satellte. Pedormance inconsistencies were characterized by
unpredictable latencies between the sending of dispatch commands to control units in the field
and receipt of those commands by the field units. These latencies resulted in variable-length
delays in shutting off irrgation pumps durng load control events. In a few cases,
issued commands did not reach the intended devices for more than one day.
In response to these satellte communication issues, prior to the load control season for 2010,
all existing satellite-based dispatch load control devices wil be replaced with similar devices that
use a different satellte network.
Nearly all of the load control units were equipped with cellular radio modems. Several
configuable operating parameters in these cellular modems were pre-programmed by M2M
Communications during device manufactue. A significant number of these devices experienced
events that caused the radios to be restored to their factory default values. The result was that
the M2M Communications embedded firmware could no longer properly communicate with
the cellular modem. An average of 24% of all devices did not provide any communication on
whether or not they were fuctioning. The impact that this problem had on tuing off pumps
during power dispatches is unclear. Testing at M2M Communications showed that some of
these devices could stil receive and execute the commands to tu off pumps, but they could not
call out to acknowledge and verify that the power had been controlled. A new version of
embedded firmware was developed to correct this problem. As of November 2009,
approximately 30% of the cellular-based units have received this firmware upgrade.
A small number of dispatch load control devices were wired incorrectly into the control circuit
on the pump electrcal service paneL. This resulted in several cases where the load control device
would operate properly, but the associated pump would continue to run. All such problem
devices are believed to have been identified and the wiring corrected.
Varous load control units experienced intermittent performance due to weak cell signal strength.
A new, more stringent standard has been implemented that increases the minimum acceptable
signal strength from -100 decibels (dB) to -95dB. Cell signal strength is being tested as par of
the firmware upgrade process, and load control devices wil be upgraded with high-gain antennas
as necessar.
Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report Page 9
Idaho Power Company
Table 4 provides a status summary of devices during each dispatch load control event, based on
the total number of installed devices and status of the service point at the time of the dispatch
event.
Table 4.Status of automatic control devices during dispatch events.
Status of automatic Date of 2009 Dispatch Load Control Events
devices at the time
of the dispatch
event
7/2/2009 7/16/2009 7/17/2009 7/21/2009 7/22/2009 7/23/2009 7/27/2009
Number of devices that 280 291 281 319 302 295 358
did not record any
communication
Number of devices that 91 90 91 78 90 77 63
had communication but
did not work
Number of devices that 352 344 370 310 368 379 384
described pumps at
service point as
already off
Number of devices that 87 99 108 65 73 73 97
described pumps at
service point as
manually turned off at
beginning of dispatch
event
Number of devices that 372 434 408 400 424 439 372
turned pumps off
Total number of 1,182 1,258 1,258 1,172 1,257 1,263 1,274
devices
Program Analysis
Load Reduction Analysis
While total load reductions from this program were impactful, determining exact amounts for
each day was challenging. Load reduction impacts were determined by reviewing four different
sets of data and past information contained in an impact analysis done by Summit Blue
Consulting, LLC, in 2004. The four data sets reviewed and summarized in this section are
M2M Communication data, Idaho Power Load Research data, Idaho Power sample substation
data, and system load data. This information was used to determine realization rates to estimate
load reduction achievement.
Realization rate is defined as the likelihood an irrgation service point is operating during
the interrpt period and can represent program equipment failures, which is used to determine
program impacts. The realization rate can be characterized as the percentage of monthly biling
demand expected to result in an actual load reduction on the system during a given interrption
Page 10 Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report
Idaho Power
period. This rate is highest at the end of June and the beginning of July when many irrgation
pumps are operating nearly 24x7. The realization rate is lower later in the irrgation season when
many irrgation pumps are tued off due to crop matuty.
Load Research Analysis- Timer Option
Each year Idaho Power reviews the realization rates, from the impact evaluation prepared by
Summit Blue Consulting, LLC, through analysis of current load research data. This year,
Idaho Power had 16, 15-minute interval load research service points in the Timer Option.
Figue 3 shows the average hourly kW for all days in July and shows the average load reduction
per participating metered service point under the Timer Option within the load research sample.
The graphed data represents the average demand (kW) for all interrpt days in 2009.
Figure 3. Average metered demand (kW) Timer Option.
Timer Option
Average Participant. Load Reduction (kW)
70 ~----~,-~r~i
"~'-
.. .. .... .. .. ..
60
~
:: 50
"0CCI 40
E
Q)Cl 30
Q)ti
~ 20Q)
~ 10
o
o 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Time of Day (Hour)
Analysis of the data used to create this graph results in an average 63 kW before the events and
9 kW durng the events. When compared to the average biling demand of 139 kW for these
service points, the analysis yields an estimated 39% reduction because of the timers. This is
the lowest percentage Idaho Power has achieved for the Timer Option. Further analysis indicated
this was caused primarily by the extremely low realization rate (6%) in the second half of June.
The rate was impacted by the high amounts of rain across Idaho Power's service area in late
June. Based on these analyses, Idaho Power believes the realization rates from the impact
evaluation continue to be a reliable and accurate means to estimate the program's load reduction
for Timer Option paricipants. Table 5 shows the program evaluation results from Summit Blue
Consulting, LLC's impact evaluation for each two-week period applicable to the 2009
program season.
Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report Page 11
Idaho Power Company
Table 5. Realization rates by period for Timer Option participants.
Period Idaho Power Realization Rate
2nd half of June
1 st half of July
2nd half of July
Average
64%
60%
53%
59%
Load Research Analysis-Manual Dispatch Option
For the Manual Dispatch Option, Idaho Power used 15-minute load research interval data from
each of the 25 participants to determine the amount ofload reduced. Figue 4 displays
the average hourly kW for all days in July and shows the average load reduction per participating
metered service point under the Manual Dispatch Option. The graphed data represents the
average demand (kW) for all interrpt days in 2009.
Figure 4. Average metered demand (kW) Manual Dispatch Option.
Manual Dispatch Option
Average Large Service Participant Load Reduction (kW)
1800
1650
~1500~-
"0 1350i:n:
E 1200eu0
eu 1050tin:..eu 900~c:
750
600
""r
,i
L ~
. . . . . . .
o 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Time of Day (Hour)
Analysis of the data used to create this graph results in an average of 1,646 kW before the events
and 812 kW durng the events. When compared to average biling demand of2,765 kW,
the analysis results in an estimated 30% reduction by this. group of customers for all events
in 2009. The 30% is an expected number for this group because they were able to leave pumps
on durng events. Because this data represents all service locations in this group, the load
reduction calculation for this group is easily obtained.
Page 12 Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report
Idaho Power
Load Research Analysis-Automatic Dispatch Option
The Automatic Dispatch Option represents the rest of the program participation. This was
the largest paricipation group with 1,105 service points enrolled. Idaho Power had 15-minute
load research meters on 54 service points throughout this group.
Figure 5 shows the average hourly kW for the days in July when the load was dispatched at
the same time from 4:00 p.m. through 8:00 p.m. It also shows the average load reduction per
paricipating metered service point under the Automatic Dispatch Option.
Figure 5. Average metered demand (kW) Dispatch Option for July 2, 16, and 17.
Automatic Dispatch Option
Average Participant Load Reduction (kW)
July 2, 16, 17
400
350
~300~-
'0 250i:
co
E 200Q)0
Q)150ii
co..100Q)::c:
50
0
-~------/~
l L
........
o 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Time of Day (Hour)
Figure 6 shows the average hourly kW for the days in July when the program was dispatched in
two staggered blocks from 2:30 p.m. through 6:30 p.m. and 4:00 p.m. through 8:00 p.m. It also
shows.the average load reduction per participating metered service point under the
Dispatch Option.
Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report Page 13
Idaho Power Company
Figure 6. Average metered demand (kW) Dispatch Option for July 22,23, and 27.
400
~350
~300-
"0i:250ro
E 200C10
C1 150bt
ro 100..
C1:;c:50
0
..~./ -/'\./
\(\.
'\J.~
. . .
Automatic Dispatch Option
Average Participant Load Reduction (kW)
July 22, 23, 27(a)
o 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Time of Day (Hour)
(a)July 21 was omitted because it was dispatched at a different time and did not include the Canyon area.
Analysis of the data used to create the prior two graphs result in an average 347 kW before
the events and 63 kW during the events. When compared to average biling demand of 474 kW,
the analysis results in an estimated 60% reduction by this group of customers for all events
in 2009.
M2M Communications Device Analysis-Automatic Dispatch Option
For the Automatic Dispatch Option, Idaho Power also used device communication data from
M2M Communications. A complete log of the operational data for each automatic device was
analyzed for each day a dispatch event occured.
The realization rates determined in Table 6 show the number of control devices that were tued
off durng each dispatch event in 2009. The analysis of this data resulted in an average
realization rate of 40% for all events. This low realization rate is primarily a result of issues
already described.
Page 14 Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report
Idaho Power
Table 6. Realized rate of automatic devices that turned off during load control dispatch events.
Status of automatic Date of 2009 Dispatch Load Control Events
devices at the time
of the dispatch
event
71212009 7116/2009 7/1712009 7/21/2009 7/22/2009 7/23/2009 7/27/2009
Total number of 459 533 516 465 497 512 469
devices that tumed off
for the dispatch event
Total number of 1,182 1,258 1,258 1,172 1,257 1,263 1,274
devices
Realization rate 39%42%41%40%40%41%37%
Substation Data Analysis
An additional way in which Idaho Power chose to calculate the potential load reduction from
the program was to analyze specific substation data where there were substantial numbers of
paricipants in the program. As an example, Figue 7 describes the load data on the event day of
July 16 from a paricular substation in the Eastern area in which there were 30 participants with
a total billng demand of5.6MW.
Figure 7. Load data from a particular substation in the Eastern area on July 16.
Substation Load in Eastern Idaho (MW)
10
9
8
~7~--c 6rt0..5c0~4rt..on..3:iV)
2
1
0
~~
l ~,-
,
l..-
~ ~ ç,~ ç,~ ç,~ ç,~ ç,~ ç,~ ç,~ ç,~ ç,~ ç,~ ç,~ ç,~ ~
t:t:Ç) ..~ :(t:Ç) ..t:Ç) "it:Ç) f)t:Ç) t;t:Ç) (,t:Ç) 'ò~ ~.~ q;~ o;~ t:~ ..t:Ç) :(t:Ç)-. ") ") -. ") ")
Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report Page 15
Idaho Power Company
The data represents 7.9 MW ofload before the event and 4 MW durng the event, which equates
to a total load reduction of3.9 MW. When compared to the total biling demand of program
participants on this parcular substation, Idao Power calculated a realization rate of 66%.
System Load Data Analysis
Another way to view the total program impact is to look at total system firm load data.
The system firm load during the summer months has the greatest electrcal demand of the year.
The highest peak load historically occurs in late June or July in the afternoon.
Figue 8 represents demand response impact to the entire Idaho Power system firm load on
July 16, 2009. On this date, load control events were initiated using the Irrgation Peak Rewards,
FlexPeak Management, and A/C Cool Credit programs. Interrptions occured from 4:00 p.m.
through 8:00 p.m. at paricipating service locations in all regions under the irrgation Dispatch
Option, the Timer Option, and the FlexPeak Management program. The A/C Cool Credit
program interrptions occured from 4:00 p.m. through 7:00 p.m. Based on the curent day
forecast, it was estimated that loads would have reached 200 MW higher than the actual loads at
peak hour. Using this information, the calculated load reduction attbutable to Irrgation Peak
Rewards is estimated to be 162 MW, which results in an overall program realization rate of 47%.
Figure 8. Total system load on July 16.
Demand Response Impact
on System Load (MW) July 16, 2009
3,050
3,000 Mw(a)
~2,950~200MW-
"0 2,850II0..
E 2,750(j..II;:V'
2,650
2,550
ç,~ç,~ç,~ç,~ç,~ç,~ç,~ç,~ç,~ç,~C "'~"I~C C c
'ò~
c a;~c
r-~i)P t;~~~~~o;~")
(')Estimated system load with no demand response.
After observing the impact that the control event days of July 2, 16, and 17 had on Idaho Power's
total system load durng the traditional hours of 4:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m., the company decided to
modify the dispatch procedure slightly to improve the effectiveness of the program.
Simultaneously turning off all pumps enrolled in the Dispatch Option created the problem of
Page 16 Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report
Idaho Power
moving the peak time to outside of the 4 p.m. to 8 p.m. period. To resolve this problem,
the Dispatch Option paricipants were grouped to allow Idaho Power to tu off approximately
half of the pumps between 2:30 p.m. and 6:30 p.m. and the other half of the pumps between
4:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. This spread the dispatched load reduction over a longer period,
but provided one and one-half hours of overlap in which both groups were dispatched durng
the time Idaho Power typically experiences its highest system loads.
Figue 9 represents demand response impact to the entire Idaho Power system firm load on
July 22,2009. On this date, load control events were initiated using the Irrgation Peak Rewards
program and FlexPeak Management program. Under the irrgation dispatch option, participating
service locations in the Southern, Western, and Canyon areas were interrpted from 2:30 p.m.
through 6:30 p.m. The Capital and Eastern areas, the Timer Option, and the FlexPeak
Management program interrptions were interrpted from 4:00 p.m. through 8:00 p.m.
Figure 9. Demand response impact on Idaho Power system firm load.
Demand Response Programs
Impact on System Load (MW)
3,060
3,040
~3,020
::3,000"0II0 2,980..
E 2,960Q)..VI;:2,940Vl
2,920
a~a~s;s;rr?nj~
a~s;
t;~
a~s;
id~
a~s;
rò~
a~s;'\~
a~s;
qj~
a~s;
ci~
-July 22 Demand Response Events: Irrigation Peak Rewards - Western, Southern, and
Canyon 2:30-6:30 p.m., Eastern and Capital 4:00-8:00 p.m.; and FlexPeak Management 4:00
8:00 p.m.
Figures 10 and 11 demonstrate the program's impact on system firm load for all irrgation
demand response events initiated in 2009. Figue 10 depicts the impacts on days when load
Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report Page 17
Idaho Power Company
control events were called from 4:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m., while Figue 11 includes days when
events occurred from 2:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m.
Figure 10. Demand response program impact on system load early- to mid-July.
Demand Response Programs
Impact on System Load
July 2, 16, 17
3,200
3,000
~2,800~
"0 2,600co0..
E 2,400Q)+JVI~V'2,200
2,000
e e q~ q~ q~ q~ q~ q~ q~ q~. q~ q~ q~ q~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~
..Ç$~ .."~ ..rt~ ,,~ rt~ n¡~ t;~ (,~ 6~ "'~ qj~ ci~ ..Ç$~ .."~
-July 2 Demand Response Events: Irrigation Peak Rewards 4:00-8:00 p.m.
--July 16 Demand Response Events: Irrigation Peak Rewards 4:00-8:00 p.m.; AC Cool Credit
4:00-7:00 p.m.; and FlexPeak Management 4:00-8:00 p.m.
-July 17 Demand Response Events: Irrigation Peak Rewards 4:00-8:00 p.m.; AC Cool Credit
4:00-7:00 p.m.; and FlexPeak Management 4:00-8:00 p.m.
Page 18 Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report
Idaho Power
Figure 11. Demand response programs impact on system load late July.
Demand Response Programs
Impact on System Load
July 21, 22, 23, 27
3,200
3,000
~2,800~-
"0co 2,6000..
E
Q)2,400..VI;:V'
2,200
2,000 ~ ..~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ 't ~ "t. ~a, ~a, ~a, r:a, ~a, ~a, ~a, ~a, ~a, ~a, ~a, ~a,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~vv ~ ~ ~
-July 21 Demand Response Events: Irrigation Peak Rewards - Western and Southern 3:00-
6:00 p.m., Eastern and Capital 5:00-8:00 p.m.; AC Cool Credit 4:00-7:00 p.m.; and FlexPeak
Management 4:00-8:00 p.m.
-July 22 Demand Response Events: Irrigation Peak Rewards - Western, Southern, and
Canyon 2:30-6:30 p.m., Eastern and Capital 4:00-8:00 p.m.; and FlexPeak Management 4:00-
8:00 p.m.
-July 23 Demand Response Events: Irrigation Peak Rewards - Western, Southern, and
Canyon 2:30-6:30 p.m., Eastern and Capital 4:00-8:00 p.m.; AC Cool Credit 4:00-7:00 p.m.;
and FlexPeak Management 4:00-8:00 p.m.
-July 27 Demand Response Events: Irrigation Peak Rewards - Western, Southern, and
Canyon 2:30-6:30 p.m., Eastern and Capital 4:00-8:00 p.m.; AC Cool Credit 4:00-7:00 p.m.;
and FlexPeak Management 4:00-8:00 p.m.
After reviewing the results from each different method used to analyze load reduction,
Idaho Power concluded that the substation data, load research data, and system load data all
resulted in a similar realization rate for July 16. Idaho Power chose to use the realization rates
calculated from load research data to determine program load reduction. These results are
described in the following section.
Load Reduction Achieved
Idaho Power attempted to distrbute the Timer Option participating service points evenly
throughout each weekday, based on cumulative load reduction potentiaL. However, due to service
point size variability, enrollment requests by customers, enrollment opt-outs, and other variables,
Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report Page 19
Idaho Power Company
the load canot be exactly balanced. All participants in the Dispatch Option were grouped into
five areas to be dispatched on each scheduled event day.
Peak biling demand data for the months of June and July 2008 were used to estimate the amount
of load enrolled in the program. The total biling demand enrolled in the program was
301,839 kW. Table 7 shows how the enrolled load was distrbuted by area.
Table 7.Enrolled billng demand by region (kW).
Timer Option (1,2,3)(al Dispatch Option(a)
Automatic Manual
1 2 3 Dispatch Dispatch Total All
Idaho Power Area DayslWeek DayslWeek DayslWeek Option Option Options
Western 79 88 532 12,301 0 13,000
Canyon 20 221 248 7,323 10,748 18,560
Capital 2,673 79 353 20,823 50,777 74,705
Southern Twin Falls 1,902 2,937 718 23,752 2,311 31,620
Mini-Cassia 9,758 424 1,009 51,900 0 63,091
Eastern 17,078 15,810 4,128 63,847 0 100,863
Total kW 31,510 19,559 6,988 179,946 63,836 301,839
(alit is important to note that this biling demand level would be achieved only if 100% of the pumps enrolled in the program were all
running at the scheduled interrption time.
Table 8 indicates the realization rates Idaho Power used to determine the load reduction for each
day of the summer 2009. As previously described, Idaho Power uses the realization rates from
Summit Blue Consulting, LLC, for the Timer Option. However, due to extremely wet weather in
June, Idaho Power's load research data analysis resulted in a lower realization rate of 6% in
the second half of June. Therefore, Idaho Power applied this realization rate for this time period.
Table 8. Realization rates used for program options.
Automatic Dispatch
Period Timer Options Option Manual Dispatch Option
2nd half of June 6%N/A N/A
1 st half of July 60%62%29%
2nd half of July 53%60%30%
Table 9 shows the MW reduction achieved daily on a week-by-week basis.
Page 20 Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report
Idaho Power
Table 9. Total program daily MW reduction using realization rates.
June 15-19
June 22-26
June 29-uly3
July 6-10
July 13-17
July 20-24
July 27-31
Mon
1.3
1.3
12.6
12.6
12.6
11.2
Tue Wed Thur Fri
1.3 1.2
1.3 1.2
11.6
13.2 11.6
10.7 11.1 11.6
(a)Shaded cells are days when dispatch events occurred
Program Costs
Cost-Effectiveness
This program had a total cost of $9.63 milion, with customer incentives and device installation
the largest two expenditures. Customer incentives were 71 % of the total costs. In future years,
when previously installed devices are utilized, the customer incentive wil make up a larger
percentage of the overall costs. Customers participating in the Irrgation Peak Rewards program
realized an average anual bil savings of 22% on each service point enrolled. Customers
enrolled in the Timer Option realized an average annual bil savings of 10%, and Dispatch
Option customers realized a 27% savings. The average incentive on a per-Hp basis across all
options was $16.50. Table 10 displays the annual program costs as of October 31,2009.
Program costs remain consistent on a year-to-year basis.
Table 10. Annual program costs.
Item
Materials and Equipment
Installation and Contract Services
Incentive payments
Marketing and Administration
Total
Program Costs
$972,073
$1,695,611
$6,826,581
$142,531
$9,636,796
Benefit-Cost Analysis
The B/C analysis for the Irgation Peak Rewards program is based on a 20-year model that uses
financial and DSM alternative costs assumptions from Appendix D-Technical Appendix for
the 2006 Integrated Resource Plan (IRP). As published in the 2006 IRP, for peaking alternatives,
such as demand response programs, 162 MW simple cycle combustion tubine is used as a cost
basis. The levelized capacity cost factors applied are $64.92/kW/yr. The benefit for shifted
energy use in the Irrgation Peak Rewards program is calculated using demand-side management
Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report Page 21
Idaho Power Company
(DSM) alternative energy costs as determined by Idaho Power's Power Supply model,
AURORApiI and published in the 2006 IRP. Idaho Power's cost-effectiveness model for
the Irrgation Peak Rewards program is updated anually with actual benefits and costs. In 2009,
the updating of the cost-effectiveness model resulted in a utility B/C ratio of 1.54. For demand
response programs, the utility cost test is the most relevant B/C analysis. For the Irgation Peak
Rewards program and other demand response programs, the participants have little or no cost.
The majority of the costs (Table 9) are the incentive payments made by the utility, and almost all
other expenses are incurred by the utility. The benefits are based on peak reduction and shifted
energy use.
Table 11 summarizes the inputs that were used in the cost-effectiveness modeL. In 2009,
the program results yielded a 20-year average B/C ratio of 1.54.
Table 11. Benefit-cost model inputs.
Description
Number of metered service points
Overall program realization rate for July
Average service point, biling kW (peak month)
Enrolled peak (kW)
Average July peak reduction (MW)(a)
Actual Program Cost (as of Oct. 31, 2009)
(a)Dispatch days only.
Input
1,512
49%
200
301,839
154
$9,636,796
Customer Satisfaction Survey Results
Idaho Power conducted a customer satisfaction surey, Idaho Power Peak Rewards Program
Follow-up Survey, from November 4 to November 19,2009. The purose ofthe surey was to
solicit feedback regarding the program. The ten-question surey was mailed to all 374 irrgators
enrolled in the Irrgation Peak Rewards program durng summer 2009. Durng the two-week
period, 129 participants responded, yielding a 34% response rate.
Figue 12 indicates the percentage of overall satisfaction with the program by participant
responses. Almost 90% of the responding participants were either very satisfied or somewhat
satisfied with the progrm. Nearly 5% of the respondents indicated dissatisfaction with
the program, for a variety of reasons related to details of program operation and other
considerations.
Page 22 Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report
Idaho Power
Figure 12. Overall satisfaction with Irrigation Peak Rewards program.
Overall Satisfaction
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%
Very satisfied 52%
Somewhat satisfied
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
Somewhat dissatisfied
Very dissatisfied
The 129 respondents reported approximately 84,257 acres of crops under irrgation. Acreages of
grain, wheat, and barley accounted for an estimated 30,166 acres, or 36%. Conversely, there
were slightly more farmers indicating hay and alfalfa as a crop in the program, though the total
acreage was 23,261 estimated acres, or 28% ofthe irrgated acreage in the program. This data is
usable by Idaho Power in marketing the program to customers who are unsure of whether they
can implement the program for the crops they grow. Figue 13 details type of crops irrgated by
pumps and approximate percent of acres reported.
Figure 13. Approximate percent of acres irrigated by pumps by crop.
Approximate Percent of Acres Irrigated by Pumps by Crop
o 5
Potatoes
GrainlWheatlBarley
Hay/Alfalfa
Sugar Beets
Corn
Beans/Peas
Onions
Pasture
Orchards
Mint
Seed Crops
Other
_ 1.76%
0%_3%
0%
0%
~1%
. ~1%
The respondents' perceived level of information provided by the electrcian installing the pump
technology is indicated in Figue 14. Of the responding paricipants, nearly 50% indicated that
the electrcian involved in the installation provided adequate information, while 20% indicated
the electrcian provided some, but not enough, information. A reason for these perceptions was
Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report Page 23
Idaho Power Company
possibly due to the work volume of the electricians installng a large amount of devices in a short
time frame. Idaho Power plans on working closely with the ILC to improve customer
communications durng installation inthe futue.
Figure 14. Information provided by the electrician.
Information Provided by Electrician
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
No information
Adequate information 50%
Some but not enough 20%
No interaction with electrician
Figue 15 displays respondents' likelihood to participate in the Irrgation Peak Rewards program
in the futue by percentage. Approximately 94% of the respondents indicated they were either
very likely or somewhat likely to participate in the Irrgation Peak Rewards program in
the futue. Idaho Power plans to increase electrcian and customer training in 2010 to address
the results.
Figure 15. Likelihood to participate in the Irrigation Peak Rewards program in the future.
Likelihood to Participate in the Future
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%
Very likely 72%
Somewhat likely
Neither likely nor unlikely
Somewhat unlikely
Very unlikely
Page 24 Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report
Idaho Power
Barers to participating in the Irgation Peak Rewards program in the futue were addressed in
the study. Respondents' barrers by percentage are listed in Figue 16. When provided a list of
potential reasons that might prevent them from participating in the program in the futue, almost
37% indicated the program worked fine. Nearly 38% indicated the incentive was too small,
30% indicated too much risk for crops, almost 23% indicated too much trouble to coordinate,
and 14% indicated it was inconvenient.
Idaho Power continues to evaluate this program and the potential incentive levels by using
the overall costs of the program and comparing them to the capacity costs and shifted energy
costs as published in the Appendix D-Technical Appendix for the 2006 IRP. The incentive level
is a major factor when irrigators consider program participation and is balanced with offering
a cost-effective program, thus the curent incentive levels are near the maximum allowable
amount while maintaining a cost-effective program.
Figure 16. Barriers to participating in the Irrigation Peak Rewards program in the future.
Barriers to Participating in Peak Rewards in the Future
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
Nothing - Program worked fine for me
Incentive too small
Too much risk for crops
Too much trouble to coordinate (system/labor)
Inconvenience
Wasn't beneficial this year
37%
38%
Lastly, more than 55% of the respondents indicated they also participated in Idaho Power's
Irrgation Effciency Program, and almost 39% of the respondents had attended an Idaho Power
workshop during winter 2009.
Conclusions
· The Irgation Peak Rewards program, which included the new Dispatch Option, increased
participation and allowed Idaho Power to achieve greater load reductions.
· Idaho Power plans to continue the program because it is a cost-effective way to reduce peak
demand on Idaho Power's electrcal system at the optimal time of day.
· The combined Timer and Dispatch Options of the program achieved a maximum peak load
reduction of 160 MW on July 2, at the generation leveL.
Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report Page 25
Idaho Power Company
· Irgation customers make significant contrbutions to Idaho Power's demand response
progrms.
· Customer Satisfaction Surey results indicated that approximately 94% of the respondents
indicated they were likely to paricipate in the Irgation Peak Rewards program in the futue.
Page 26 Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report