20100518Comment.pdf

May 18 10 08:35a p.2
Commssion Secretay
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
P.O. Box 83720
Boise, Idaho 83720-0014
RECEIVED
2ØlOPlAY r8 AM 9:50
IDAHO P¡ IPL¡r~'
UTIliTIES co1lPvllšsioN
May 18, 2010
Re: In the Matter of the Application ofIdaho Power Company for Authority to
Implement Power Cost Adjustment (PCA) rates for Electric Service from June 1,2010
through May 31, 2011, Case No. IPC-E- 10-12, Notice of Modified Procedure -
Comments by Magic Water Company, Inc.
Dear Commission Secretay
Magic Water Company, Inc. cordially responds to the Idaho Power proposed rate
increase for irrigation customers for the 2010 irrgation season.! .
It is shameful that Idaho Power Company is asking for almost a 14% rate increase in
irgation rates for the 20 i 0 irrgation season, then tr to disguise the rate increase as a
rate decrease using theiPCA reuction because we had a good water year last year. What
happens next year since we are having a bad water ths year, and the peA goes back up?
We are stuck with the 14% rate increase plus a revised PCA.
Secondly, Idaho Power Company has publicly said they reached an agreement earlier in
the year that both the Idao Public Utilities Commission (pUC or Commission) and
Idaho Power Company had reached an agreement not to increase rates until 2012. Now
we have a proposed rate increase of ths magnitude? This borders on criminal as false
advertising.
Idaho Power Company is proposing a 14% rate increase durng one of the most
economically depressed times in the history of the United States. The dairy industry is
franly in the toilet, figutively speakg, and fanng in general have some of the
lowest far prices in recent history, along with astronomical high costs for power, fuel~
fertilizer, and just about anyting else within their budgets. In fact all facets of State
governent and local businesses are reducing their budgets to surve this downtur.
We have atached to this letter, a sumary of our 2009 electrcal bils for our primary
pumping costs. Please keep in mind, that these are primay pumping costs, and do not
include our secondary pumping costs (tht is the costs of pumping water into our
sprinker and irrigation systems which essentially double the costs we are showing you
here).
We are also sho'wing you our pumping costs using the 2009 usage, but insering the
proposed 2010 dramatic rate increases. Finally, we show you a sumary between the
two years, by category, of what each increases, along with its percentage increase.
., I ?1
May 18 10 08:36a p.3
We would also like to c rnent on the energy efficiency charge which increas by
28.40%. The energy ef ciency charge has gone up more dramatically than the other
charges since they were substantially less before June 1,2009. This increase is absur.
Also, with our high lift pumping station, we have little available to increae our
effciency any more than what we already have. So we cannot use what we ar paying out
within our 0\\11 system. It seems absurd that we wil pay more than $30,000 next year in
energy effciency charges when we cannot use them in our own operation. Secondly, it
grssly unfair that all rate users are not paying for ths energy efficiency charge in that all
rate users benefit frm it. Vlhy is such a high ratio being put on irrgation rates? At a
minimum, there should be some kind oflimit in dollar terms, placed on what a company
should have to pay in effciency charges.
You should also be aware; our primary power bils totaled $441,561 in 2005. In 2009,
they totaled $733,974, a $292,413 increase in four year, for a whopping 66% increase or
an average 16.5% increase each year! That is atrocious! Please keep in mind that does
not include our secondr power which increased just as much!
Idaho Power's proposed rates will increase our primar power bil by another $79,816 in
2010 alone. \\l'hen crop prices have dropped so dramatically, it appear that Idaho
Power's soul purpose in continually rasing rates is to drive agrculture out of business.
It is also apparent that the demand rate has gotten completely out ofline. Idaho Power is
now asking for $5.58 per kW. That means it costs $558 just to tum on a 100-HP pump,
even if you use it one day. That is ridiculous! The demand rae should no longer be
calculated on a meter by meter basis. We have a total faning project, and we use many
different pumps one time or another. So, Idaho Power Company is chargig for a
demand for each time a different pump is tued on, when another one might be tured
off, when in reality, our total demand for our total farmng project did not go up. That is
totally unfair because the demand for Idaho Power Company did not increase.
Finally, we would like to point out, tht our average kilowatt cost for 2009 was $0.0626 a
kilowatt. And we know, you can skew all of the different costs you have in the equation
for electrical costs you want, but the end result is that if you tae our total bil in total
dollars spent, and divide by the total kilowatts of power we used, we are paying $0.0626
a kilowatt, no matter how you cut it.
I might add, we are now paying more for a kilowatt of power, than Idaho Power is paying
for the purchase of power frm wind generation. There is something amiss when
pumpers pay more for electrcity than Idaho Power is paying to purchase wind from wind
producers. That borders on the insane.
-i/i
May 18 10 08:36a pA
In conclusion, we ask that the Commission set a formal heang on this matter and fuer
more, Magic Water Company, Inc. opposes ths horrendous rate increase in these
trubled economic times.SU; .ff
Ard M, 2, Secret3
Magic Water Company, Inc.
Cc: Idao Power Company
Lisa Nordstrom
Donovan E. Waler
Scott Wright
Greg Said
Cc: Magc Irgators, Jtc.
Maurice H. Eckert:& Son's, Inc.
M & R Fars, Inc.:
Lasen Magic Farrs, Inc.
3/,
May 18 10 08:36a p.5
Iii
Magic Water Company, Inc.
2009 Acual Bilin s Total Demand Demand Allocaæ Total kWh kWh Allocate Rates
March 2009" 29 davs (3J03109 to 4101101
Demand CharQe kW 0 0 $0.000000 $0.00
Enerav Charae kWh 0 0 $0.043234 $0.00
PCA Chame 0 $0.002419 $0.00
Energy Effciencv $0.08
Customer Charge $3.00
Total Bil $3.08
ADril 2009 - 29 days 14/02'09 to 05/01/09)
Demand Charae kW 3,492 0 $0.000000 $0.00
Enerav Charae kWh 1,117,917 1,117,917 572,688 $0.047816 $27,383.65
Enerav Charae kWh 1.117,917 545,229 $0.047816 $26,070.67
PCACharge 1,117,917 $0.007864 $8,791.30
Enerav Effciencv i $1.336.43
Customer Charge I $3.00
Total Bm 563585.05
Mav. 2009 . 32 days (30+2) (05101/09 to 06102109'
Demand Charae kW 3,528 3,308 $4.900000 $16,206.75
Demand Charae kW 3,528 221 $4.900000 $1,080.45
Energv Charae kWh 2,020,772 578,592 542,430 $0.039752 $21,562.68
Enemv Charge kWh 1,442,180 1.352.044 $0.038594 $52.180.78
Enemv Charae kWh 2,020.772 578,592 36.162 $0.040581 $1,467.49
Enerav Charae kWh 1,442.180 90,136 $0.039397 $3,551.10
PCACharae 1,894,474 $0.007864 $14,898.14
PCACharge 126,298 50.014022 $1,770.95
Enemv Effcîencv $2,538.87
Customer Charae 515.75
Total 8 il
!t115 272.96
June 2009.29 davs l6/02!09 to 07101109)
Demand Charge kW 3,548 3,548 $4.900000 $17,385.20
Energv Chame kWh 1,477,145 1,477,145 581,872 $0.Q40581 $23,612.95
Enemy Charae kWh 1,477,145 895,273 $0.039397 $35.271.07
PCA Credit 1,477,145 $0.014022 $20,712.53
Enemv Efficiency $3.623.54
Customer Charge $15.75
Tota' Bil
5100621.04
Julv. 2009.30 dav$ (7/01109 to 07/31/09)
Demand Charge kW 4,016 4,016 i $4.900000 $19.678.40
EnerQV CharQe kWh 2,363,426 2.363,426 658,624 $0.040581 $26,727.62
Enemv Chame kWh 2,363.426 1.704,802 $0.039397 $61,164.08
PCA Charge 2,363,426 $0.014022 $33,139.96
Energv Effciencv $5,395.33
Customer Chame
9i15.75
Total Bil
$152.12.1.14
May 18 10 08:37a p.6
Z!i¡
Auii 2009 ~ 31 days 17131'09 to 08/3~109~
Demand Chame kW 4,024 4,024 $4.900000 $19,717.60
Enerav Chama kWh 2,839,016 2,639.016 659,936 $0.040581 $26,780.86
Enerav Charae kWh 2,639,016 2.179,080 $0.039397 $85,849.21
peA CharQe 2,839.016 $0.014022 $39,808.68
Enen:iv Effíciency $6,287.26
Customer Charge $15.75
Total Bill 9ì178459.37
$eDt 2009.30 davs '8131/09 to 9130109
Demand Charge kW ~,528 3,528 $0.000000 $0.00
Energy Charge kWh 1,779,196 1,779,196 578,592 $0.048811 $28,241.65
Enerov Charae kWh 1,779,196 1.200,604 $0.048811 $58,602.68
PCACharge 1.779,196 $0.014022 $24,947.89
Energv Effciency $4,125.25
Customer Charge i3.00
Total Bil
$115J~20.47
Oct 2009 - 30 davs (9/30109 to 10/30/09
Demand Charge kW 1,508 1,508 $0.000000 $0.00
Enerav Charge kWh I 122,852 122,852 122.852 $().048611 $5,996.53
PCACharge 122.852 $0.014022 $1,722.63
Energv Efficiency $284.98
Customer Charge $3.00
Total Bil
$8007.14
I Totals I
Average Cost Per Kilowatt
11,720.324 I i
$
I
0.0626
$733,990.25 i
May 18 10 08:37a p.7
~
Maaic Water ComDanv, Inc.
2009 Usina 2010 Rates ¡Total OemandlOemand Allocated Total kWh ¡kWh AllocateclI T i i I Rates I Total I
l Bilina I
March. 2009.29 days 13103/09 to 4101/09)
Demand Charge kW 0 0 SO.OOOOOO 50.00
Enerov Charae kWh 0 0 $0.055518 $0.00
PCA CharQe 0 $0.003130 $0.00
Enerav Efficiency $0.08
Customer Charge $.3.00
Total Bil $3.08
ADril 2009.29 davs 14102/09 to 05101109\
Demand Charge kW 3,492 0 $0.000000 $0.00
Energv Charne kWh 1,117,917 1,117,917 572,688 $0.048811 $27,953.47
Enerav Charge kWh 1,117,917 545.229 $0.048811 $26,613.17
PCA Chame 1,117,917 $0.014022 $15,675.43
Enerav Effciencv $2,592.06
Customer CharQe $3.00
Total Bill i $72837.14
Mav 2009.32 davs t30+2~. 105/01109 to 06/02/C91
Demand Charge kW 3,528 3,308 $5.580000 $18,455.85
Demand Charge kW 3,528 221 $5.580000 $1.230.39
Energv Charae kWh 2,020,772 578,592 542,430 $0.046149 $25,032.60
EnerQV Charge kWh 1,442,180 1,352,044 $0.044801 $60,572.91
Enerav Charae kWh 2,020,772 578,592 36,162 $0.046149 $1.668.84
Enerav Charaa kWh 1,442,180 90,136 $0.044801 $4,038.19
PCACharae 1,894,474 $0.003130 $5,929.70
PCACharge 126.298 $0.003130 $395.31
Energv Effciencv $5,273.29
Customer Charge i.17.85
Total Bil $122614.95
June 2009.29 davs (6102/0Q to 07101109\
Demand Charae kW 3,548 3,548 $5.580000 $19,797.84
Energv Charge kWh 1,477,145 1,477,145 581,872 $0.046149 $26,852.81
Enerov Charae kWh 1,477,145 895,273 $0.044801 $40.109.13
PCA Credit 1,477,145 $0.003130 $4,623.46
Energv Effciency $4,121.94
Customer Charge $17.85
Total Bill $95523.03
Julv. 2009.30 days m01/09 to 07131/09\
Demand Charge kW 4,016 4,016 $5.560000 $22,409.28
Enemv Charas kWh 2,363,426 2,363,426 658,624 $0.046149 $30,394.84
Enemv Charne kWh 2,363,426 1,704,802 $0.044801 $76,376.83
PCA Charge 2,363,426 $0.003130 $7,397.52
Energv Efficiencv 56,136.94
Customer Charge $17.85
Tolal Bill $142733.27
May 18 10 08:37a p.8
t./y
AUD. 2009.31 davs (7/31/09 to 08J3~109\
Demand Charge kW 4,024 4,024 $5.580000 $22,453.92
Enerav Charae kWh 2,839,016 2,839,016 659,936 $0.046149 $30,455.39
Energy Charge kWh 2,839,016 2,179,080 $0.044801 $97,624.96
PCACharae 2,839,016 $0.003130 $8,886.12
Enerov Efficiencv $7,151.23
Customer Charae S17.8f
Total Bil $166589.47
Sect 2009 . 30 davs (8/31/09 to 9130109
Demand Char~e kW 3,528 3,528 $0.000000 $0.00
Energv Charrie kWh 1,779.196 1,779.196 578,592 $0.055518 $32,122.27
Enemv Charge kWh 1,779,196 1,200,604 $0.055518 $66,655.13
PCA Charae 1,779,196 $0.003130 $5,568.88
Energv Effciencv $4,692.09
Customer Charçie $_3.40
Total Bil t109041.78
Oct 200.30 days '9130109 to 10130/09
Demand Charcie kW 1,508 1,508 $0.000000 $0,00
Energv Charae kWh !122,852 122,852 122,852 $0.055518 $6,820.50
PCACharae 122,852 $0.014022 $1,722.63
Energv Efficiency $324.14
Customer Chame i $3.40
Total Bil ¡$8870.66
¡Totals I
Average Cost Per Kilowatt
11,720,324 I I
$
I
0.0613
$718,213.36 1
Percent
Oescriotion 2009 2010 Channa
Demand Charges $74,063.4Q $84,347.28 13.88%
Enerav Charaes $ 490.46.02 $553,291.04 12.81%
Enerav Efficiency $23,591.75 $30,291.69 28.40%
Customer Charge $75.00 $84.30 12.40%
Totals $ 588.198.17 $668,014.31 13.51%
peA $ 145,792.08 $50,199.05 -65.57%