HomeMy WebLinkAbout20220429Ellsworth Direct.pdf
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF IDAHO POWER
COMPANY’S APPLICATION FOR A
CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC
CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY TO
ACQUIRE RESOURCES TO BE ONLINE
BY 2023 TO SECURE ADEQUATE AND
RELIABLE SERVICE TO ITS
CUSTOMERS.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CASE NO. IPC-E-22-13
IDAHO POWER COMPANY
DIRECT TESTIMONY
OF
JARED L. ELLSWORTH
ELLSWORTH, DI 1
Idaho Power Company
Q. Please state your name, business address, and 1
present position with Idaho Power Company (“Idaho Power” or 2
“Company”). 3
A. My name is Jared L. Ellsworth and my business 4
address is 1221 West Idaho Street, Boise, Idaho 83702. I 5
am employed by Idaho Power as the Transmission, 6
Distribution & Resource Planning Director for the Planning, 7
Engineering & Construction Department. 8
Q. Please describe your educational background. 9
A. I graduated in 2004 and 2010 from the 10
University of Idaho in Moscow, Idaho, receiving a Bachelor 11
of Science Degree and Master of Engineering Degree in 12
Electrical Engineering, respectively. I am a licensed 13
professional engineer in the State of Idaho. 14
Q. Please describe your work experience with 15
Idaho Power. 16
A. In 2004, I was hired as a Distribution 17
Planning engineer in the Company’s Delivery Planning 18
department. In 2007, I moved into the System Planning 19
department, where my principal responsibilities included 20
planning for bulk high-voltage transmission and substation 21
projects, generation interconnection projects, and North 22
American Electric Reliability Corporation’s (“NERC”) 23
reliability compliance standards. I transitioned into the 24
Transmission Policy & Development group with a similar 25
ELLSWORTH, DI 2
Idaho Power Company
role, and in 2013, I spent a year cross-training with the 1
Company’s Load Serving Operations group. In 2014, I was 2
promoted to Engineering Leader of the Transmission Policy & 3
Development department and assumed leadership of the System 4
Planning group in 2018. In early 2020, I was promoted into 5
my current role as the Transmission, Distribution and 6
Resource Planning Director. I am currently responsible for 7
the planning of the Company’s wires and resources to 8
continue to provide customers with cost-effective and 9
reliable electrical service. 10
Q. What is the purpose of your testimony in this 11
case? 12
A. The purpose of my testimony is to present the 13
load and resource balance utilized in the Integrated 14
Resource Plan (“IRP”) development and the identification of 15
Idaho Power’s 2023 capacity deficit. I will describe the 16
evaluation of potential solutions for meeting the capacity 17
deficiency. Finally, I will provide support for the 18
acquisition of new resources to address identified near-19
term peak capacity needs. 20
I. BACKGROUND 21
Q. What is the goal of the IRP? 22
A. The goal of the IRP is to ensure: (1) Idaho 23
Power’s system has sufficient resources to reliably serve 24
customer demand and flexible capacity needs over a 20-year 25
ELLSWORTH, DI 3
Idaho Power Company
planning period, (2) the selected resource portfolio 1
balances cost, risk, and environmental concerns, (3) 2
balanced treatment is given to both supply-side resources 3
and demand-side measures, and (4) the public is involved in 4
the planning process in a meaningful way. Historically, 5
the Company developed resource portfolios to eliminate 6
resource deficiencies identified in a 20-year load and 7
resource balance. 8
Q. Please explain the “load and resource 9
balance.” 10
A. The load and resource balance is the Company’s 11
tabulated plan that identifies resource deficiencies during 12
the 20-year IRP planning horizon. It incorporates the 13
expected availability of Idaho Power’s existing resources, 14
comparing the total output to the Company’s forecasted 15
load, and illustrates the resulting surplus or deficit by 16
month. This will identify the Company’s first resource 17
need date, or the point at which Idaho Power’s reliability 18
requirements may not be met. The availability of existing 19
resources, including Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act 20
(“PURPA”) projects, power purchase agreements, hydro, coal, 21
gas, demand response, and market purchases, is determined 22
using a number of factors such as expected stream flows, 23
plant run times, forced outages, and transmission 24
availability, among other considerations. 25
ELLSWORTH, DI 4
Idaho Power Company
Q. What is the purpose of the load and resource 1
balance? 2
A. The load and resource balance helps ensure 3
Idaho Power has sufficient resources to meet projected 4
customer demand plus a margin to account for extreme 5
conditions, reserves, and resource outages. It is critical 6
when comparing future resource portfolios that each plan 7
achieve at least a base reliability threshold. 8
Q. Have previous load and resource balance 9
results indicated Idaho Power will be resource sufficient 10
in the near-term? 11
A. Yes. The Company has been generally resource-12
sufficient since the addition of the Langley Gulch natural-13
gas fired power plant almost a decade ago. The load and 14
resource balance from the Second Amended 2019 IRP did not 15
show a capacity deficiency occurring until the summer of 16
2028. However, Idaho Power has rapidly moved from an 17
expected resource-sufficient position through 2028, to a 18
near-term capacity deficiency starting in 2023, resulting 19
in the need to rapidly acquire resources as discussed in 20
the Company’s request in this case. 21
II. LOAD AND RESOURECE BALANCE MODIFICATIONS 22
Q. When did Idaho Power identify that there was a 23
resource deficiency starting in 2023? 24
ELLSWORTH, DI 5
Idaho Power Company
A. The Company first identified a 2023 resource 1
deficiency in the spring of 2021 while refreshing the load 2
and resource balance during development of a Valmy Unit 2 3
exit analysis, as directed by the Commission in Order No. 4
34349, Idaho Power’s request to update rates to reflect the 5
accelerated depreciation associated with an early exit from 6
coal-fired operations at Valmy, Case No. IPC-E-19-08. 7
The Company filed this request on June 27, 2019; 8
however, during processing of the case, Idaho Power 9
determined that further review of the 2019 IRP modeling, 10
which was used to develop the Valmy Unit 2 exit analysis, 11
was necessary and the case schedule was suspended while the 12
review was performed. The Company completed its review of 13
the 2019 IRP modeling and filed its Second Amended 2019 IRP 14
in October 2020. Following the filing of the Second Amended 15
2019 IRP, in the first quarter of 2021, Idaho Power began 16
preparing the required Valmy Unit 2 exit analysis, which 17
included an evaluation of system reliability. This analysis 18
was performed simultaneously with preparation of the 2021 19
IRP, and the refreshed load and resource balance was 20
further refined through the remainder of the development of 21
the 2021 IRP. 22
Q. Did Idaho Power make any adjustments to the 23
load and resource balance used in the Second Amended 2019 24
ELLSWORTH, DI 6
Idaho Power Company
IRP as a result of the review performed as part of the 1
Valmy Unit 2 exit analysis? 2
A. Yes. The load and resource balance was 3
updated to include modifications to existing resource 4
availability, as is standard when developing the load and 5
resource balance as part of the IRP process. 6
Q. Please describe the modifications to the 7
existing resource availability. 8
A. First, the Company identified changes to its 9
market purchase assumptions. Additionally, the existing 10
resource availability was revised to include updated 11
thermal capacity and reduced demand response capacity 12
determined through the refinement of its reliability 13
evaluation. The net change between the Second Amended 2019 14
IRP and the updated load and resource balance used for the 15
Valmy Unit 2 exit analysis was a reduction of approximately 16
480 MW - 500 MW in available capacity each July during the 17
2022 through 2025 time period. 18
Market Purchase Assumptions 19
Q. What market purchase assumptions were used to 20
develop the load and resource balance used for the Second 21
Amended 2019 IRP? 22
A. To explain the market purchase assumptions, it 23
is necessary to first describe the regional transmission 24
market in general. Transmission lines connect Idaho Power 25
ELLSWORTH, DI 7
Idaho Power Company
to wholesale energy markets and help economically and 1
reliably mitigate variability of intermittent resources 2
through the transfer of electricity between utilities, not 3
only to serve load, but also to share operating reserves. 4
The Company experiences its peak load at different times of 5
the year compared to most Pacific Northwest utilities. As 6
a result, Idaho Power can purchase energy from Mid-C during 7
its peak and sell excess energy to the Pacific Northwest 8
utilities during their peak. Although energy is plentiful 9
at the Mid-C market, imports from Mid-C are frequently 10
limited by transmission availability. The proposed Boardman 11
to Hemingway (“B2H”) project would greatly increase this 12
transmission capacity, but the Company does not anticipate 13
the B2H project being in-service earlier than 2026. 14
Q. What transmission paths are available to Idaho 15
Power to bring in energy? 16
A. The Company typically imports energy from Mid-17
C during the summer months from the west on the Idaho to 18
Northwest transmission path. A portion of this 19
transmission capacity is reserved by BPA to serve its 20
southern Idaho customers. Energy can be brought in from 21
Mid-C via Montana on the Idaho to Montana path as well, 22
which consists of two lines connecting Montana to the 23
Northeast of the Company’s system. South of Idaho are the 24
ELLSWORTH, DI 8
Idaho Power Company
Mead, Palo Verde, and Four Corners market hubs, 1
collectively referred to as the Southern Hubs. 2
Q. Does Idaho Power purchase energy from the 3
Southern Hubs? 4
A. Yes, but less frequently since the southern 5
utilities are also summer peaking. Simultaneous demand 6
increases in the intermountain region can create 7
unfavorable pricing. In addition, a purchase from the 8
Southern Hubs will often require multiple transmission 9
wheels that can be difficult to obtain due to transmission 10
availability constraints. The Idaho to Sierra path, the 11
path that energy from the Valmy 345 kV line connects to, 12
and the Idaho to Utah path, which has more line 13
interconnections, also run to the south of Idaho Power’s 14
transmission system. However, currently there is no firm 15
transmission capacity available across NV Energy’s 16
transmission system, and other than an existing 50 MW Idaho 17
Power reservation across the PacifiCorp East system, there 18
is limited availability through Utah. 19
Q. Were market purchase assumptions updated 20
during the development of the Valmy study load and resource 21
balance compared to the market purchase assumptions used in 22
the Second Amended 2019 IRP? 23
A. Yes. Market conditions changed dramatically 24
in the south due to ripple effects from the energy 25
ELLSWORTH, DI 9
Idaho Power Company
emergency event in California in August 2020 (“August 2020 1
event”), requiring an update to the market purchase 2
assumptions used for the load and resource balance in the 3
Second Amended 2019 IRP. 4
Q. What happened during the August 2020 event? 5
A. During August 2020, the west experienced a 6
heat wave, increasing the demand for energy and causing 7
several balancing authorities across the Western 8
Interconnection to declare energy emergencies. Generation 9
was not able to meet demand in California and transmission 10
capacity was strained, limiting California’s ability to 11
import energy. As a result, the California Independent 12
System Operator was required to curtail customer demand to 13
maintain reliability and the security of the bulk power 14
system. 15
Understanding the importance of transmission 16
availability during times of high electricity demand, 17
entities began reserving transmission capacity across the 18
west, including just outside the Company’s border, 19
significantly limiting Idaho Power’s access to market hubs. 20
Idaho Power’s own transmission service queue was flooded 21
with multi-year requests with third-party marketing firms 22
looking to move energy from Mid-C across Idaho Power’s 23
transmission system to the south. The transmission service 24
ELLSWORTH, DI 10
Idaho Power Company
requests have added to an already constrained transmission 1
market limiting the Company’s access to Mid-C. 2
Q. What market purchase assumptions used in the 3
load and resource balance for the Second Amended 2019 IRP 4
did the Company update in the load and resource balance 5
used for the Valmy Unit 2 exit analysis? 6
A. A key assumption used to develop the load and 7
resource balance for the Second Amended 2019 IRP was that 8
Idaho Power’s exit from coal-fired operations at Valmy 9
would free up transmission capacity for imports to Idaho 10
from the Southern Hubs. To reflect the recent market 11
changes, the Company eliminated this key assumption, and 12
assumed Idaho Power could only rely on access to the 13
Southern Hubs to provide 50 MW of capacity in the summer 14
months. 15
Q. Did Idaho Power test the possibility of a 16
market import to help meet reliability requirements? 17
A. Yes. The Company issued an RFP on April 26, 18
2021, for the delivery to Idaho of firm capacity and energy 19
during the summer months through 2025 to help determine 20
whether transmission availability exists to import from the 21
market to maintain reliability and at a price that is 22
economical. However, Idaho Power received no bids, 23
indicative of evolving market conditions. 24
ELLSWORTH, DI 11
Idaho Power Company
Q. What was the net reduction in transmission 1
capacity availability incorporated into the updated load 2
and resource balance for the analysis review period? 3
A. For the years 2022 through 2025, Idaho Power 4
reduced the transmission availability within the load and 5
resource balance by approximately 140 MW to 277 MW during 6
the peak load month of July. 7
Planning Margin Assumptions 8
Q. What is Idaho Power’s planning margin? 9
A. The Company’s planning margin is intended to 10
provide a sufficient generation resource reliability margin 11
to prevent the need to curtail customer demand. The 12
planning margin is intended to cover (1) Idaho Power’s 13
contingency reserve obligation, (2) severe weather events, 14
both extreme heat and extreme cold, (3) poor water 15
conditions, and (4) planned and unplanned resource and 16
transmission outages. 17
Q. How did the Company compute the planning 18
margin in the Second Amended 2019 IRP? 19
A. In the Second Amended 2019 IRP, Idaho Power 20
established a 15 percent planning margin. Planning margin 21
was calculated as 15 percent of the Company’s average (50th 22
percentile) peak demand forecast for each month. For 23
example, if Idaho Power had a peak-hour-load of 3,500 MW, 24
ELLSWORTH, DI 12
Idaho Power Company
the Company would add the planning margin and target 4,025 1
MW of resource capacity (3,500 multiplied by 1.15). 2
Q. Did Idaho Power consider any enhancements to 3
the planning margin utilized in the Second Amended 2019 IRP 4
to meet reliability requirements as part of the Valmy Unit 5
2 exit analysis? 6
A. Yes. Following the development of the Second 7
Amended 2019 IRP, the Company looked to refine its planning 8
margin to ensure consideration of issues specific to Idaho 9
Power’s system. A simple 15 percent planning margin was 10
utilized in the Second Amended 2019 IRP. Individual 11
utilities experience varying frequencies of demand 12
extremes, forced outage rates among resources, and resource 13
size compared to load size, all of which should be 14
considered when determining the planning margin. Rather 15
than continue to utilize the 15 percent planning margin, 16
the Company used more sophisticated probabilistic methods 17
in the Valmy Unit 2 exit analysis to determine system needs 18
to ensure reliability for all hours of the day on the 19
Company’s system, referred to as the Loss of Load 20
Expectation (“LOLE”) method. 21
Q. What is the LOLE approach for determining the 22
planning margin to meet reliability requirements? 23
A. The LOLE approach allows for a comparison of 24
load to generation on an hourly basis over a specified 25
ELLSWORTH, DI 13
Idaho Power Company
period. A common industry practice is to plan the power 1
system such that it has no more than one loss of load event 2
per 10 years, or an LOLE of 0.1 days per year1. The Company 3
used a 0.1 days per year LOLE in the Valmy Study. In the 4
2021 IRP, given feedback from the IRP Advisory Council, and 5
the increased frequency of extreme events, including 6
extreme water conditions, among other variables, the 7
Company ultimately aligned with the Northwest Power and 8
Conservation Council standard of no more than one loss of 9
load event per 20 years, or an LOLE of 0.05 days per year. 10
An LOLE of 0.05 days per year yields a planning margin of 11
approximately 15.5 percent. Idaho Power believes the LOLE 12
method’s hourly approach fully considers the reliability 13
value of renewable resources over time compared to the 14
previous method. 15
Q. Aside from taking a more granular hourly 16
approach, are there other components of the LOLE method 17
that impacted the Company’s determination of resource 18
needs? 19
A. Yes. The LOLE method also evaluates the 20
ability of existing resources to meet peak demand through 21
the determination of Effective Load Carrying Capability 22
(“ELCC”). 23
1 The Southwest Power Pool, PJM Interconnection, and the Midcontinent
Independent System Operator are among those that use this probabilistic
approach.
ELLSWORTH, DI 14
Idaho Power Company
Q. Did the use of the ELCC result in any changes 1
to the peak-serving capability of Idaho Power’s existing 2
resources? 3
A. Yes. When analyzing Idaho Power’s system on an 4
hour-by-hour basis, the results indicated the ability of 5
its existing demand response programs to meet peak load 6
under the changing dynamics of Idaho Power’s system was 7
significantly lower than previously assumed. This is 8
primarily the result of increased solar resources on the 9
Company’s system pushing net peak load hours outside the 10
longstanding demand response program dispatch window of 1 11
PM to 9 PM. 12
Q. Did the Company use the LOLE approach when 13
determining reliability requirements for the 2021 IRP? 14
A. Yes, the LOLE approach was also used for 15
meeting reliability requirements over the 20-year planning 16
horizon in development of the 2021 IRP. For purposes of 17
the Valmy Unit 2 exit analysis, Idaho Power performed the 18
LOLE analysis for the years 2023 and 2025. 19
Q. What capacity deficit was identified as a 20
result of the LOLE study performed for 2023? 21
A. Utilizing the new ELCC values and the updated 22
transmission assumptions, the load and resource balance 23
showed a deficit of 381 MW in July 2023 assuming the early 24
exit of Valmy Unit 2 and one unit at the Jim Bridger Power 25
ELLSWORTH, DI 15
Idaho Power Company
Plant (“Bridger”) at year-end 2022, and the addition of 1
Jackpot Solar in 2023. 2
Other Assumptions 3
Q. Were any additional assumptions modified as 4
part of the development of the load and resource balance 5
for the Valmy Unit 2 exit analysis? 6
A. Yes. The peak load forecast was updated with 7
the latest expectations for 2023 through 2025. Although 8
relatively immaterial, the 2023 through 2025 peak load 9
expectations were approximately 8 MW greater than 10
anticipated in prior years for a total capacity deficit of 11
389 MW in July 2023.2 12
Q. Based on the results of load and resource 13
balance due to the revised assumptions, what was Idaho 14
Power’s conclusion? 15
A. After refining the load and resource balance, 16
it is clear that Idaho Power is unable to meet reliability 17
requirements if participation in coal-fired operations of 18
both Valmy Unit 2 and a Bridger unit cease in 2022 without 19
an alternate source of peak capacity. The Company 20
determined it needed to keep both Valmy Unit 2 and all 21
Bridger units through 2023. 22
2 Assuming the early exit of Valmy Unit 2 and one unit at Bridger at
year-end 2022, and the addition of Jackpot Solar in 2023.
ELLSWORTH, DI 16
Idaho Power Company
Q. What was the final capacity deficiency 1
identified for 2023 as a result of the previously discussed 2
analyses? 3
A. The load and resource balance utilized in the 4
development of the Valmy Unit 2 exit analysis identified a 5
78 MW capacity deficit in 2023. 6
Q. Were any changes made to the load and resource 7
balance used for the 2021 IRP process? 8
A. Yes. Subsequent to the completion of the 9
Valmy Unit 2 exit analysis in May 2021, the Company 10
continued to update its load and resource balance through 11
the 2021 IRP, resulting in an increase to the expected 2023 12
capacity deficit from 78 MW to 101 MW. A number of factors 13
drove this increase including, but not limited to: (1) 14
greater load growth projections, (2) revisions to the 15
aforementioned LOLE from 0.1 days per year to 0.05 days per 16
year, (3) updates to expected capacity of the Company’s 17
demand response programs, (4) further refinement of the 18
ELCC’s of variable resources, and (5) limiting “market 19
purchases” to only transmission secured across third-party 20
transmission providers to a market hub, among other items. 21
III. MEETING THE CAPACITY DEFICIENCY 22
Q. Has the Company taken actions to acquire 23
resources to meet the 2023 capacity deficit? 24
ELLSWORTH, DI 17
Idaho Power Company
A. Yes. Under Idaho law, Idaho Power has an 1
obligation to provide adequate, efficient, just, and 2
reasonable service on a nondiscriminatory basis to all 3
those that request it within its certificated service area.3 4
In order to meet its obligations to reliably serve customer 5
load, and given the extremely short turn-around to 6
construct a resource to meet a summer 2023 deficit, 7
particularly in the midst of supply chain disruption, 8
ongoing COVID-19 impacts, and constraints in the industry 9
and in ancillary industries, on June 30, 2021 the Company 10
conducted a competitive solicitation through a Request for 11
Proposals (“RFP”) seeking to acquire up to 80 MW of peak 12
capacity resources to meet the 2023 capacity deficit - 13
seeking projects to be online by June of 2023. 14
Company witness Eric Hackett will discuss in greater 15
detail the development of the RFP, the issuance of the RFP, 16
and the evaluation of the RFP responses, as well as the 17
investigation into potential Company-owned and constructed 18
battery storage opportunities in his testimony. 19
Q. Did Idaho Power evaluate any alternative 20
solutions for meeting the 2023 capacity deficiency to avoid 21
building a new resource? 22
A. Yes. Idaho Power investigated several 23
alternative options for meeting the identified capacity 24
3 Idaho Code §§ 61-302, 61-315, 61-507.
ELLSWORTH, DI 18
Idaho Power Company
deficits, including possible modifications to existing 1
demand response programs, expansion of the existing pricing 2
programs, and the potential for other short-term market 3
solutions. None of those alternative options proved to be 4
viable at this time. 5
Q. What was the result of Idaho Power’s 6
investigation into potential modifications to the existing 7
demand response programs? 8
A. As I mentioned earlier, when analyzing Idaho 9
Power’s system on an hour-by-hour basis, the results 10
indicated that under current program parameters, the ELCC 11
of the existing 380 MW demand response portfolio is 12
estimated to be approximately 17 percent. That is, of the 13
total 380 MW demand response portfolio capacity, only 65 MW 14
can be relied upon to meet the highest-risk Loss-of-Load 15
Probability (“LOLP”) hours, or the statistical likelihood 16
of the system demand exceeding the available generating 17
capacity during a given time period, typically an hour. 18
The existing demand response programs, as structured, were 19
not effective at meeting system needs over the planning 20
horizon. 21
Q. Did the Company evaluate what modifications 22
could be made to the demand response program parameters to 23
more effectively meet future high-risk LOLP hours? 24
ELLSWORTH, DI 19
Idaho Power Company
A. Yes. Idaho Power evaluated potential 1
modifications to program parameters in an attempt to better 2
align the resource with system needs. The Company 3
conducted several sensitivity analyses to determine the 4
parameter adjustments needed to more effectively meet the 5
high-risk LOLP hours. The Company identified several 6
program criteria, including events per week, events per 7
season, time available, length of program season, and total 8
hours dispatched per week, and then evaluated the impact to 9
the ELCC of the demand response portfolio. The sensitivity 10
analyses concluded that the dispatch times available and 11
the length of the program season had the highest impact on 12
the ELCC of demand response. 13
Q. Did Idaho Power file a request with the 14
Commission to modify its demand response programs based on 15
these evaluations? 16
A. Yes. On October 1, 2021, following completion 17
of the evaluation, the Company filed a request in Case No. 18
IPC-E-21-32 to modify several demand response programs to 19
address the changes in system need and operations. On 20
March 4, 2022, the Commission issued Order No. 35336, 21
approving Idaho Power’s proposed modifications to the 22
demand response programs, and tariff revisions, to be 23
effective prior to the 2022 demand response season that 24
begins June 15, 2022. 25
ELLSWORTH, DI 20
Idaho Power Company
Q. What resource potential does demand response 1
provide? 2
A. As part of the rigorous examination of the 3
potential for expanded demand response, the Company 4
utilized a Northwest Power and Conservation Council 5
(“NWPCC”) assessment of demand response potential in the 6
Northwest. Based on this assessment Idaho Power estimated 7
584 MW of demand response potential within the Company’s 8
service area. With the assumed reduction in participation 9
beginning in 2022 as a result of the demand response 10
program modifications approved with Order No. 35336, the 11
380 MW nameplate capacity was adjusted to 300 MW for 2022. 12
Q. What is the ELCC of the 300 MW demand response 13
portfolio using the parameters with the modifications? 14
A. The Company estimates the approximate ELCC of 15
a demand response portfolio with the modifications to be 16
58.5 percent, or approximately 176 MW, a 170 percent 17
improvement in effectiveness from current program 18
parameters. However, clarity on program subscription and 19
the resulting ELCC will not occur until mid-May 2022 20
providing some uncertainty around contribution to peak load 21
during the upcoming program seasons. 22
Q. How was demand response included in Idaho 23
Power’s 2021 IRP modeling? 24
ELLSWORTH, DI 21
Idaho Power Company
A. The 2021 IRP modeling process included the 1
total 584 MW of demand response potential, with an estimate 2
of 300 MW of capacity from existing resources, and the 280 3
MW of additional demand response available for selection in 4
the AURORA long-term capacity expansion modeling. This 5
additional demand response capacity was divided into 20-MW 6
bundles per year for selection by the model up to the 7
threshold. 8
Q. Were any of these bundles selected in the 9
Preferred Portfolio of the 2021 IRP as a solution for 10
meeting the 2023 capacity deficit? 11
A. Yes. The 2021 IRP Preferred Portfolio 12
included an additional 100 MW of demand response that comes 13
in 20 MW bundles, in varying years: 20 MW in 2023, 20 MW in 14
2025, and the remaining 60 MW beyond 2037. However, it is 15
important to note that Idaho Power first identified the 16
2023 capacity deficit of 78 MW in March 2021, when the 2021 17
IRP was still in development, prior to finalizing the 18
demand response program evaluation and the filing with the 19
Commission of proposed changes. Recognizing the urgency of 20
the capacity deficit, the Company began work to develop and 21
process an RFP for 2023 peak capacity resources while the 22
2021 IRP was in development. So, while the results of the 23
2021 IRP indicate 20 MW of demand response is a cost-24
effective resource addition in 2023, it is insufficient 25
ELLSWORTH, DI 22
Idaho Power Company
without other resources to ensure Idaho Power can provide 1
reliable and adequate electric service to customers. 2
Q. Did the evaluation of existing and potential 3
pricing programs identify any potential resource solutions? 4
A. No. The NWPCC assessment of demand response 5
also included the potential associated with pricing 6
programs, notably time-of-use (“TOU”) and critical peak 7
pricing (“CPP”), for possible peak shifting. The Company 8
currently has existing TOU offerings in both its Idaho and 9
Oregon jurisdictions, with 1,000 customers enrolled in the 10
Idaho offering and less than five customers enrolled in the 11
Oregon pilot program. With the level of customer 12
participation data, the sample used to develop a 13
comprehensive and reliable assessment of residential peak 14
shifting would be outside an acceptable margin of error 15
tolerance limit at approximately +/- 60 percent. As such, 16
circumstantial behavioral changes could misrepresent peak 17
shifting impacts when expanded to the full residential 18
customer class. Without comprehensive historical data from 19
a larger sample population, Idaho Power believes it is 20
premature to modify existing, or implement new pricing 21
programs as a potential resource solution to the 2023 22
capacity deficiency. 23
ELLSWORTH, DI 23
Idaho Power Company
Q. Will Idaho Power continue to evaluate the TOU 1
program performance for possible peak shifting in the 2
future? 3
A. Yes. The Company continues to assess the TOU 4
programs and any potential modifications that could 5
encourage customer participation. In addition, Idaho Power 6
is actively evaluating the potential for a CPP offering. 7
At the direction of the Public Utility Commission of 8
Oregon, the Company will report the TOU pilot performance 9
and potential changes to the offering as well as the 10
potential for a CPP offering as part of its annual 11
Distribution System Planning report, beginning in the 12
summer 2022 report. 13
Q. What other potential short-term market 14
solutions did the Company pursue? 15
A. During preparation of the Valmy Unit 2 exit 16
analysis and identification of transmission constraints 17
requiring changes to load and resource balance assumptions, 18
the Company issued an RFP on April 26, 2021, for the 19
delivery of firm capacity and energy during the summer 20
months beginning 2023. The intent was to test the 21
transmission deliverability and resource market 22
availability of a replacement resource for Valmy Unit 2. 23
Idaho Power received no bids, indicative of the evolving 24
market conditions leading to the Company’s reduced 25
ELLSWORTH, DI 24
Idaho Power Company
transmission import assumption in the load and resource 1
balance. 2
Q. Based on the lack of viable alternatives to 3
meet the near-term capacity deficits identified by the IRP 4
planning process, what actions has the Company taken to 5
ensure continued, safe, and reliable operations? 6
A. As detailed in Company witness Mr. Hackett’s 7
testimony, the RFP process resulted in the selection of a 8
40 MW solar PV plus 40 MW energy storage project, 9
consisting of a 20-year PPA associated with a 40 MW solar 10
PV facility that supplies energy to the Company’s system 11
combined with an Idaho Power-owned 40 MW battery storage 12
facility. In addition, the Company’s parallel investigation 13
into different configurations of grid-charged battery 14
energy storage systems identified a second capacity 15
resource: an Idaho Power-owned 80 MW battery storage 16
facility. The combined 120 MW of battery storage will 17
adequately address near-term capacity deficits and ensure 18
the Company is able to provide safe, reliable service to 19
its customers. 20
Q. Since the completion of the 2021 IRP, has the 21
Company continued to monitor other factors that could 22
influence the load and resource balance, and by extension, 23
Idaho Power’s resource need? 24
ELLSWORTH, DI 25
Idaho Power Company
A. Yes. While the load and resource balance 1
prepared for an IRP is the primary source of information 2
used to inform resource procurement decisions, the Company 3
also recognizes that during the near-term resource 4
decision-making phase, the capacity deficit period can be 5
very fluid. As a result, it is important that the IRP load 6
and resource balance continue to be evaluated to also 7
consider near-term known changes, operational enhancements, 8
limitations, or constraints on the existing system, if any, 9
to adequately inform resource needs today. 10
Q. As part of this near-term evaluation, did the 11
Company identify any near-term known changes having the 12
potential to impact the need for new resources? 13
A. Yes. First, Idaho Power’s service area 14
continues to experience very high load growth. Based on 15
recent economic activity, the 2023 load forecast has 16
increased by 33 MW, or 38 MW after applying the 15.5 17
percent planning margin, when compared to the load forecast 18
used for the 2021 IRP. Also, in late 2021, an opportunity 19
arose for the Company to purchase 76 MW of energy delivered 20
to its border. On December 16, 2021, Idaho Power executed 21
an agreement for the delivery of 76 MW to Idaho Power’s 22
border, for the months June through September 2022 through 23
2024, seven days a week during heavy load hours. 24
ELLSWORTH, DI 26
Idaho Power Company
Q. Does this short-term market purchase of 76 MW 1
have the potential to help address the deficit identified 2
in 2023? 3
A. Yes. The 76 MW market purchase will reduce 4
the projected capacity deficit identified in the load and 5
resource balance for 2023. However, because the 76 MW 6
purchase is for 2022 through 2024, this short-term purchase 7
only has the effect of deferring, not eliminating, the 8
growing resource need. 9
Q. Is Idaho Power aware of any factors that 10
contribute to operational enhancements, limitations, or 11
constraints on the Company’s system that would impact the 12
capacity deficit in 2023? 13
A. Yes. Idaho Power has identified some 14
incremental resource opportunities and constraints. The 15
Company plans to install a number of battery storage 16
systems at various distribution substations as a cost-17
effective resource, allowing the deferral of transformer 18
upgrades, and providing an additional 11 MW of four-hour 19
duration storage capacity. In addition, the Company has 20
identified cost-effective upgrades at two gas plants and 21
expects to gain approximately 20 MW of capacity. Finally, 22
a planned refurbishment of one hydro unit at the American 23
Falls facility will reduce the overall resource 24
availability by 30 MW during the summer of 2023. Similar 25
ELLSWORTH, DI 27
Idaho Power Company
outages are planned at American Falls through the summer of 1
2025. 2
In addition to the known impacts to the 2023 3
capacity deficiency, there are three more factors that 4
could potentially impact the continued safe, reliable 5
operations of Idaho Power’s existing resources during the 6
summer of 2023. First, uncertainty exists around Bridger 7
Unit 2 operations beginning May 2022 and Bridger Unit 1 8
operations beginning January 1, 2023, and their ability to 9
help meet peak capacity needs until a resolution for 10
meeting Regional Haze compliance has been achieved. The 11
uncertainty at Bridger is further amplified by the 12
Environmental Protection Agency’s proposed expansion of its 13
Federal Implementation Plan Addressing Regional Ozone 14
Transport for the 2015 National Ambient Air Quality 15
Standards (CSAPR) to include the state of Wyoming, which 16
will establish NOx emissions budgets requiring fossil fuel-17
fired power plants such as Bridger to participate in an 18
allowance-based ozone season trading program beginning in 19
2023. 20
Second, one of the three Hells Canyon units, Unit 1 21
which has a name plate rating of approximately 150 MW, 22
recently experienced an outage unexpectedly due to an 23
internal fault and is now out of service indefinitely. The 24
Company has been unable to inspect the outaged unit due to 25
ELLSWORTH, DI 28
Idaho Power Company
maintenance work nearing completion on Unit 3. Internal 1
faults often result in severe damage, and it is uncertain 2
whether Idaho Power will have this unit back online by 3
summer of 2023. Finally, those items, coupled with the 4
lack of clarity around demand response program contribution 5
to peak load discussed earlier in my testimony, contributes 6
to a very fluid capacity deficit period. 7
Q. Based on your evaluation of the near-term 8
factors having the potential to impact the load and 9
resource balance, what is your estimate of the resulting 10
surplus or deficit? 11
A. Given the various increments and decrements, 12
including the 120 MW of battery storage, to the load and 13
resource balance, the Company estimates that it will exceed 14
the 0.05 LOLE threshold by approximately 30 MW in 2023, net 15
of current, near-term factors. This slight capacity length 16
will become a capacity deficit if aforementioned 17
uncertainties around Bridger materialize, or Hells Canyon 18
Unit 1 remains out of service. However, if a capacity 19
length exists, Idaho Power will use the 30 MW to reduce 20
power purchases. 21
Q. Do you believe there is sufficient support for 22
the procurement of the combined 120 MW of battery storage 23
resources? 24
ELLSWORTH, DI 29
Idaho Power Company
A. Yes, I do. The 120 MW of battery storage was 1
pursued and procured as a least cost/least risk method of 2
meeting the 2023 capacity deficit identified in the 3
Company’s 2021 IRP. The fluidity of the load and resource 4
balance, continued high load growth, and the risks 5
associated with resource availability in the near-term 6
further support this resource procurement. 7
Q. Will this resource procurement impact Idaho 8
Power’s need for additional resources in 2024? 9
A. The Company is currently evaluating its needs 10
for 2024 based on the various near-term factors, including: 11
(1) an additional year of load growth, (2) 72 MW of PURPA 12
solar contracts for incremental resources in Oregon that 13
have been executed, (3) the possible 30 MW of capacity 14
length in 2023, (4) implications of the Western Resource 15
Adequacy Program (WRAP), (5) greater certainty around 16
demand response program potential in late-spring of 2022, 17
and (6) evaluation of the resource need in 2025 and the 18
potential of spreading the acquisition over multiple years. 19
The Company will continue to monitor these near-term 20
operational factors and their potential impact on Idaho 21
Power’s need for additional resources in 2024. 22
// 23
// 24
// 25
ELLSWORTH, DI 30
Idaho Power Company
IV. CONCLUSION 1
Q. Please summarize your testimony. 2
A. The load and resource balance was updated as 3
part of the Valmy Unit 2 exit analysis and again as part of 4
development of the 2021 IRP to include modifications to 5
existing resource availability ultimately identifying a 6
capacity need in 2023 of 101 MW. Idaho Power evaluated 7
potential solutions for meeting the capacity deficiency 8
that might avoid the need for a new supply-side resource, 9
but did not ultimately identify any viable options. In the 10
absence of such viable alternatives, the Company has 11
executed an agreement to procure a combined 120 MW of 12
battery storage resources to satisfy the identified 13
capacity need. To further inform its near-term resource 14
procurement decisions, the Company performed a supplemental 15
evaluation of currently known operational enhancements, 16
limitations, and constraints on the system that have the 17
potential to impact resource needs. The results of those 18
evaluations continue to support the near-term need for the 19
acquisition of 120 MW of peak capacity resources. 20
Q. Does this complete your testimony? 21
A. Yes, it does. 22
ELLSWORTH, DI 31
Idaho Power Company
DECLARATION OF JARED L. ELLSWORTH 1
I, Jared L. Ellsworth, declare under penalty of 2
perjury under the laws of the state of Idaho: 3
1. My name is Jared L. Ellsworth. I am 4
employed by Idaho Power Company as the Transmission, 5
Distribution & Resource Planning Director for the Planning, 6
Engineering & Construction Department. 7
2. On behalf of Idaho Power, I present this 8
pre-filed direct testimony in this matter. 9
3. To the best of my knowledge, my pre-filed 10
direct testimony is true and accurate. 11
I hereby declare that the above statement is true to 12
the best of my knowledge and belief, and that I understand 13
it is made for use as evidence before the Idaho Public 14
Utilities Commission and is subject to penalty for perjury. 15
SIGNED this 29th day of April 2022, at Boise, Idaho. 16
17
Signed: 18
19