20131120Service Standards Report.pdf

ROCKY MOUNTAIN
POITIIER 1l!: !:4r!
iLii..i:,.!
t..
ri ,i
i': !r. i.?ii,. i- LL..:i
201 South Main, Suite 2300
Salt Lake City, Utah 84111
November 20,2013
VIA OWRNIGHT DELIWRY
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
47 2 W est Washington Street
Boise ID 83720
Attention: Jean Jewell, Commission Secretary
RE: Service Standards Report Submitted Pursuant to Case No. PAC-E-05-08
Merger Commitment: I 19
Please find enclosed Rocky Mountain Power's mid-year report for the period January 1,2013
through June 30, 2013 detailing Rocky Mountain Power's performance in meeting the service
standards approved in the above docket.
If you have any questions or require further information, please call me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Yr"/r* d A-,fqr-
Barbara Coughlin, Director
Customer and Regulatory Liaison
Cc:Beverly Barker - Idaho Public Utilities Commission
Enclosure
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
POWER
A DIVISION OF PACIFICORP
IDAHO
SERVICE AUALITY
REVIEW
Januaryl-June30,2013
Report
RCICKYMOUNTANFOITER Seruice Quality Review
January - June 201 3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTTVE SUMMARY ........... ........3
1 SERVICE STANDARDS PROGRAM SUMMARY.......... ..............,..3
1.1 ldaho Customer Guarantees .............. ......................3
1.2 ldaho Performance Standards............... ...................4
1.3 Reliability Definitions ..............5
2 RELlABrLrry PERFORMANCE....... .............7
2.1 System Average lnterruption Duration lndex (SAlDl)...... ...........9
2.2 System Average lnterruption Frequency lndex (SAlFl) ............10
2.3 Reliability History...... ............11
2.4 Cause Code Analysis ...........12
2.4.1 Underlying Cause Analysis Table ...................13
2.4.2 Cause Analysis Charts....... ............14
2.5 lmprove Worst Performing Circuits orAreas by Target Amount..... ...........16
2.6 Geographic Outage History of Under-performing Areas ..........17
2.7 Restore Service to 80% of Customers within 3 Hours..... .........20
2.8 Telephone Service and Response to Commission Complaints.......,.,.,., ....................20
3 CUSTOMER GUARANTEES PROGMM STATUS ,,.,.,....,,.....,,,.21
Page2 of 21
ROCKY MOUNTAN
POU'ER Service Quality Review
IDAHO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
January - June 201 3
Rocky Mountain Power has a number of Customer Service Standards and Service Quality Measures
with performance reporting mechanisms currently in place. These standards and measures define
Rocky Mountain Power's target performance (both personnel and network reliability performance) in
delivering quality customer service. The Company developed these standards and measures using
industry standards (to the extent they exist) for collecting and reporting performance data. ln some
cases, Rocky Mountain Power has decided to exceed these industry standards. ln other cases, largely
where the industry has no established standards, Rocky Mountain Power has developed metrics, targets
and reporting. These standards and measures can be used over time, both historically and
prospectively, to measure the service quality delivered to our customers.
1 SERVICE STANDARDS PROGRAM SUMMARYI
1.1 ldaho Customer Guarantees
Customer Guarantee 1:
Restoring Supply After an Outage
The Company will restore supply after an outage
within 24 hours of notification with certain exceptions
as described in Rule 25.
Customer Guarantee 2:
Appointments
The Company will keep mutually agreed upon
appointments, which will be scheduled within a two-
hour time window.
Customer Guarantee 3:
Switching on Power
The Company will switch on power within 24 hours of
the customer or applicant's request, provided no
construction is required, all government inspections
are met and communicated to the Company and
required payments are made. Disconnections for
nonpayment, subterfuge or thefUdiversion of service
are excluded.
Customer Guarantee 4:
Estimates For New Supply
The Company will provide an estimate for new
supply to the applicant or customer within 15 working
days after the initial meeting and all necessary
information is provided to the Companv.
Customer Guarantee 5:
Respond To Billing lnquiries
The Company will respond to most billing inquiries at
the time of the initial contact. For those that require
further investigation, the Company will investigate
and respond to the Customer within 10 workinq days.
Customer Guarantee 6:
Resolving Meter Problems
The Company will investigate and respond to
reported problems with a meter or conduct a meter
test and report results to the customer within 10
workino davs.
Customer Guarantee 7:
Notification of Planned I nterruptions
The Company will provide the customer with at least
two days' notice prior to turning off power for planned
interruotions
Nofe: See Rules for a complete description of terms and conditions for the Customer Guarantee Program.
' On June 29,2012, in Docket PAC-E-12-02 and Order 32583, the Commission ordered that Rocky Mountain Power had
delivered upon commitments it made in pursuant to the MidAmerican transaction in PAC-E-05-08 and Order 29998. The
Commission also ordered the acceptance of modifications to the Service Standards Program proposed by Rocky Mountain
Power, as shown on Page 4 oi 15.
Page 3 of 21
ROCKY MOTJNHIN
POWER Seruice Quality Review
IDAHO1.2 ldaho Performance Standards
January - June 201 3
Network Performance Standard 1:
Report System Average lnterruption Duration lndex
(sArDr)
The Company will report Total, Underlying, and
Controllable SAIDI and identify annual Underlying
baseline performance targets for the reporting
period. For actual performance variations from
baseline, explanations of performance will be
provided. The Company will also report rolling
twelve month performance for Controllable, Non-
Controllable and Underlyinq distribution events.
Network Performance Standard 2:
Report System Average lnterruption Frequency
lndex (SAlFl)
The Company will report Total, Underlying, and
Controllable SAIFI and identify annual Underlying
baseline performance targets for the reporting
period. For actual performance variations from
baseline, explanations of performance will be
provided. The Company will also report rolling
twelve month performance for Controllable, Non-
Controllable and Underlyinq distribution events.
U nder-Perform ing Areas
Annually the Company will select at least one
underperforming are? based upon a reliability
performance indicator'(RPl). Within five years after
selection the Company will reduce the RPI by an
average of 10o/o for the areas selected in a given
year. The Company will identify the criteria used for
determining these areas and the plansa to address
them.
Network Performance Standard 4:
Supply Restoration
The Company will restore power outages due to loss
of supply or damage to the distribution system within
three hours to 80% of customers on averaqe.
Customer Service Performance Standard 5:
Telephone Service Level
The Company will answer 80% of telephone calls
within 30 seconds. The Company will monitor
customer satisfaction with the Company's Customer
Service Associates and quality of response received
by customers through the Company's eQuality
monitorino svstem.
Customer Service Performance Standard 6:
Commission Complaint Response / Resolution
The Company will a) respond to at least 95% of non-
disconnect Commission complaints within three
working days and will b) respond to at least 95% of
disconnect Commission complaints within four
working hours, and will c) resolve 95% of informal
Commission complaints within 30 davs.
Note:o Performance Standards 1, 2 & 4 are for undelying pefiormance days and exclude fhose c/assffied as
Major Events.
'When in the future, the Company discovers that marginal improvement costs outweigh marginal improvement benefits, the
Company can propose modifications to the Performance Standards Program to recognize that maintaining performance levels
is appropriate.
" Reliability performance indicators (RPl) will be calculated by aggregating customer transformer level SAlDl, SAlFl, and MAlFl,
and are exclusive of major events as calculated by IEEE '1366-2012; they are a modification to the Company's historic CPl.
RPI excludes breaker lockout events.a Prospectively, the Company will work with Commission Staff to determine methods to report the target area performance and
cost-benefit results.
Page4 of 21
ROCKY MOUNTANFOWER Service Quality Review
IDAHO1.3 ReliabilityDefinitions
January - June 201 3
This section will define the various terms used when refening to interruption types, performance
metrics and the internal measures developed to meet its performance plans.
lnterruption Tvpes
Below are the definitions for interruption events. For further details, refer to IEEE 1366-2003t20125
Standard for Reliability lndices.
Sustained Outage
A sustained outage is defined as an outage greater than 5 minutes in duration.
Momentary Outage Event
A momentary outage event is defined as an outage equal to or less than 5 minutes in duration.
Rocky Mountain Power historically captured this data using substation breaker fault counts, but where
SCADA (Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition) exists, uses this data to calculate consistent with
|EEE 1366-2003t2012.
Reliabilitv !ndices
SAIDI
SAIDI (system average interruption duration index) is an industry-defined term to define the average
duration summed for all sustained outages a customer experiences in a given period. lt is calculated
by summing all customer minutes lost for sustained outages (those exceeding 5 minutes) and dividing
by all customers served within the study area. When not explicitly stated otherwise, this value can be
assumed to be for a one-year period.
Daily SAIDI
ln order to evaluate trends during a yeat and to establish Major Event Thresholds, a daily SAIDI value
is often used as a measure. This conceptwas introduced in IEEE Standard 1366-2003. This is the
day's total customer minutes out of service divided by the static customer count for the year. lt is the
total average outage duration customers experienced for that given day. When these daily values are
accumulated through the year, it yields the year's SAIDI results.
SAIFI
SAIFI (system average interruption frequency index) is an industry-defined term that attempts to
identify the frequency of all sustained outages that the average customer experiences during a given
period. lt is calculated by summing all customer interruptions for sustained outages (those exceeding
5 minutes in duration) and dividing by all customers served within the study area.
CAIDI
CAIDI (customer average interruption duration index) is an industry-defined term that is the result of
dividing the duration of the average customer's sustained outages by frequency of outages for that
average customer. While the Company did not originally specify this metric under the umbrella of the
Performance Standards Program within the context of the Service Standards Commitments, it has
since been determined to be valuable for reporting purposes. lt is derived by dividing PS1 (SAlDl) by
PS2 (SArFr).
MAtFtE
MAIFIE (momentary average interruption event frequency index) is an industry-defined term that
attempts to identify the frequency of all momentary interruption events that the average customer
experiences during a given time-frame. lt is calculated by counting all momentary interruptions which
u IEEE 1366-2003/2012 was first adopted by the IEEE Commissioners on December 23,2003. The definitions and
methodology detailed therein are now industry standards, which have since been affirmed in recent balloting activities.
Page 5 of 21
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
POTTER Service Quality Review
IDAHO January - June 2013
occur within a 5 minute time period, as long as the interruption event did not result in a device
experiencing a sustained interruption. This sequence of events typically occurs when the system is
trying to re-establish energy flow after a faulted condition, and is associated with circuit breakers or
other automatic reclosing devices.
CEMI
CEMI is an acronym for Customers Experiencing Multiple (Sustained and Momentary) lnterruptions.
This index depicts repetition of outages across the period being reported and can be an indicator of
recent portions of the system that have experienced reliability challenges. This metric is used to
evaluate customer-specific reliability.
cPt99
CPl99 is an acronym for Circuit Performance lndicator, which uses key reliability metrics of the circuit
to identify underperforming circuits. lt excludes Major Event and Loss of Supply or Transmission
outages. The variables and equation for calculating CPI are:
cPl=lndex*((sAlDl*wF*NF)+(sAlF!*wF*NF)+(MAlFl*WF*NF)+(Lockouts*WF*NF))
lndex: 10.645
SAIDI: Weighting Factor 0.30, Normalizing Factor 0.029
SAIFI: Weighting Factor 0.30, Normalizing Factor 2.439
MAIFI: Weighting Factor 0.20, Normalizing Factor 0.70
Lockouts: Weighting Factor 0.20, Normalizing Factor 2.00
Therefore, 10.645"((3-yearSAlDl *0.30.0.029)+(3-yearSAlFl *0.30.2.439)+(3-yearMAlFl .
0.20 * 0.70) + (3-year breaker lockouts " 0.20.2.00)) = CPI Score
cPt05
CPl05 is an acronym for Circuit Performance lndicator, which uses key reliability metrics of the circuit
to identify underperforming circuits. Unlike CPl99 it includes Major Event and Loss of Supply or
Transmission outages. The calculation of CPl05 uses the same weighting and normalizing factors as
cPr99.
RPI
RPI is an acronym for Reliability Performance lndicator, which measures reliability performance on a
specific segment of a circuit to identify underperforming circuit segments rather than measuring
performance of the whole circuit. This is the company's refinement to its historic CPl.
Performance Tvpes & Commitments
Rocky Mountain Power recognizes two categories of performance: underlying performance and
major events. Major events represent the atypical, with extraordinary numbers and durations for
outages beyond the usual. Ordinary outages are incorporated within underlying performance. These
types of events are further defined below.
Major Events
A Major Event is defined as a 24-hour period where SAIDI exceeds a statistically derived threshold
value, Reliability Standard I EEE 1 366-200312012.
Underlying Events
Within the industry, there has been a great need to develop methodologies to evaluate year-on-year
performance. This has led to the development of methods for segregating outlier days, via the
approaches described above. Those days that fall below the statistically derived threshold represent
"underlying" performance and are valid (with some minor considerations for changes in reporting
practices) for establishing and evaluating meaningful performance trends over time.
Page 6 of 21
ROCKYMOI,NTAN
Seruice Quality Review
IDAHO January - June 201 3
2 RELIABILITY PERFORMANCE
During the reporting period, the Company experienced underlying interruption duration (SAID!) and
interruption frequency (SAlFl) results that were better than plan. Performance results for ldaho
underlying performance can be seen in subsections 2.1 and2.2 below.
Two events during the reporting period met the Company's ldaho major event threshold levelo for an
exclusion of 6Tstate SAIDI minutes from underlying performance results.
Major Event General Descriptions
o On January 14, 2013, a loss of supply event occurred to a transmission line between Ricks
Junction and St. Anthony; this was due to a broken conductor, and resulted in loss of power to
Rocky Mountain Power ("Company") customers served by Moody, Canyon Creek, Newdale,
St. Anthony, Ashton, Targhee, Sugar City, and Rexburg substations.
Twenty-eight circuits experienced sustained interruptions, affecting 47o/o of the Company's
Rexburg customers (20o/o of its ldaho customers).o On April 29, 2013, strong winds caused damage to Rocky Mountain Power's facilities resulting
in significant outages to its customers in ldaho due to poles and conductor falling, airborne
objects blown into facilities, pole fires, and high winds whipping lines into other lines or
vegetation. ln addition, a circuit breaker at Goshen substation failed catastrophically,
accounting for about a third of the total event customer minutes lost.
Twenty-six substations and 42 circuits experienced sustained interruptions, affecting 41o/o ol
the Company's Shelley customers (160lo of its ldaho customers). Facilities replacement
included one distribution pole and 6 crossarms.
6 ln 2005, the Company adopted via its Service Standard Program filing, the use of IEEE 1366-2003, wherein a statistically
based threshold for a Major Event Day is developed. At the time of the development of the Merger Commitment targets and
pre-merger baselines, it was estimated that approximately 39 SAIDI minutes and 0.4 SAIFI events were embedded in these
metrics. The charts included do not reflect the exclusion of these minutes.
PageT of21
PRIMARY CAUSE
Loss of Substation (storm
ROCKYMOUNTAINFolTER Seruice Quality Review
IDAHO January - June 201 3
Four significant event daysT were recorded, which account for 18.5 SAID! minutes, about 25o/o ol the
reporting period's underlying 74 SAIDI minutes. Significant event days add substantially to year on
year cumulative performance results. Fewer counts of significant event days generally result in better
reliability, while more significant event days generally mean poorer reliability results.
Significant Event General Descriptions
o 112912013: Lava 1 1 broken insulator pin burned crossarm; Shelley 13 car hit pole, wire downo 31612013: Loss of Ammon substation due to 2 poles down on Goshen-Ammon 69kV; Rigby 12
due to pole fire on transmission pole with distribution underbuildo 41812013: Loss of transmission due to storm with 2 poles down on Jefferson-Osgood 69kV. 612912013: Emergency damage repair Winsper 21 and 22, deenergized substation for testing,
installed mobile
7 On a trial basis, the Company established a variable of 1.7itimes the standard deviation of its natural log SAIDI results.
Page 8 of 21
PRIMARY CAUSE
Loss of transmission
R(XKY MOTNTTAINFOWER Service Quality Review
January - June 201 3
2.1 System Average lnterruption Duration lndex (SAlDl)
Throughout the reporting period, the Company's underlying interruption duration performance tracked
significantly better than plan.
IDAHO SAIDI
(excludes Preananged and Customer Requested)
(Y) (o (r) (q (r) (i: (o (a (q co (v, c.,
ooooooooooooN Gl (\t C\t Gl (\,t (\,t N N N 6l (\t
6I(r)*lr)(ON@O)ON
300
250
o 200g
fc
= 150
o-
o 1oo
50
0
2013 SAIDI Plan thru June
Page 9 of 21
R(XKYMOTTUTAN
POWER Seruice Quality Review
January - June 2013
2.2 System Average lnterruption Frequency Index (SAlFl)
Throughout the reporting period, the Company's underlying interruption frequency performance
tracked significantly better than plan.
2013 SAIFI Plan2013 SAIFI Plan thru June
IDAHO SAIFI
(excludes Preananged and Customer Requested)
ooooooooooooooooooooooooNNNNNNNNNNNN
fGIO-i6(ONO<DON
Page 10 of 21
ROCKY MOUNTANPIOWER1ffi6@ Service Quality Review
IDAHO January - June 201 3
2.3 Reliability History
Depicted below is the history of reliability in ldaho. ln 2002, the Company implemented an automated
outage management system which provided the background information from which to engineer
solutions for improved performance. Since the development of this foundational information, the
Company has been in a position to improve performance, both in underlying and in extreme weather
conditions. These improvements have included the application of geospatial tools to analyze reliability,
development of web-based notifications when devices operate more than optimal, focus on operational
responses via CAIDI metric analysis, in addition to feeder hardening programs when specific feeders
have sig nificantly im pacted rel iability performance.
ldaho Reliability History - lncluding Maior Events
-CAIDI
+SAIFI
400
300,
ofc
=200
100
0CY09 CY10 CY11 CY12 CY1s-Jun
3oc0)
l,lJ
2
-SAlDl
ldaho Reliability History - Excluding Major Events
-SAlDl -CAlDl
-r-SAlFl
400
300,If
=200
100
0
4
3oEo
uJ 2
1
0 CY03 CY04 CY05 CY06 CY07 CY08 CY09 CY10 CY11 CY12 CY13-Jun
Page11of21
R(XKY MOuNfAF.l
Service Quality Review
IDAHO January - June 201 3
2.4 Gause Gode Analysis
The tables and charts below show the total customer minutes lost by cause and the total sustained
interruptions by cause. The charts show each cause category's role in performance results and
illustrate that certain types of outages account for a high amount of customer minutes lost but are
infrequent, while others tend to be more frequent but account for few customer minutes lost.
Following the charts is a table of cause categories with direct cause definitions and examples.
Note that the Underlying cause analysis table includes prearranged outages (Cusfomer Requested
and Customer Notice Given line items) with subtotals for their inclusion, while the grand totals in the
table exclude these prearranged outages so that grand totals align with reported SAID! and SAIFI
metrics for the period. However, for ease of charting, the pie charts reflect the rollup-level cause
category rather than the detail-level direct cause within each category. Therefore, the pie charts for
Underlying include prearanged causes (listed within the Planned category). Following the pie charts,
a table of definitions provides descriptive examples for each direct cause category.
Page 12 of 21
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
FOWER Service Quality Review
January - June 2013
2,4.1 Underlying Cause Analysis Table
Direct Cause Category Direct Cause Customer Minutes
Lost br lncident
Customers ln
lncident Sustained
Sustained
lncident Count
ANIMALS
qNMALS 152,93t E4t 8t
3IRD MORTALTTY (NONPROTECTED SPECIES)4.fi2 10:1t
3IRD MORTALITY (PROTECTED SPECIES) (BMTS)4,49t 2l
3IRD NEST (BMTS)2,35i 1e 6
3IRD SUSPECTED, NO MORTALTI-Y 25,7il 36S 11
ENVIRONMENT EIRE/SMOKE (NOT DUE TO FAULTS)
EQUIPMENT FAILURE
3/O EQUIPMENT 230,93(1,90t 122
)ETERIORATION OR ROTTING 1.018.83t 6,271 414
CVERLOAD 1,19t
)OLE FIRE 310,174 1,41 1:
INTERFERENCE
)tG-tN (NON-PACTFTGORP PERSONNEL)9,36:37 1t
f,THER INTERFERING OBJECT 67,O71 41(1C
CTHE R UTILITY/CONTRACTOR 31Ja 6E(A
I/ANDALISM OR THEFT 741 1
'/EHICLE ACCIDENT 249.80!1,68t 41
LOSS OF SUPPLY -OSS OF SUBSTANON 364,58'6,13t o
-OSS OF TRANSMISSION LINE 949,164 1 1,381 5(
OPERATIOML
=AULTY INSTALL 6t 1
MPROPER PROTECT]VE COORDINIATION 13,2EI 4t
NCORRECT RECORDS y2
OT}IER f,THER, KNOWN CAUSE 3E,05t 491 2i
JNKNOWN 436,70€4,58(17t
PLANNED
}ONSTRUCTION 157,893 534 11
SONSIRtJCI]ON SCHEDULED SWTICHING 26,87t 2t
SUSTOMER NOTICE GIVEN 1,266,51€6,39t *
]USTOMER REQUESTED 1 3,1 9S 1A 10!
=MERGENCY DAMAGE REPAIR 793,321 8,26t 13'i
NTENTIOML TO CLEAR TROUBLE 6,94t 20i
TRANSM ISSION REQUESTED 1il,22t 1,514
TREES TREE - NON-PREVENTAEILE 28,693 214 31
TREE . TRIMMABLE 14,581 92 1
WEATHER
rcE 51
LIGHTNING 115,503 1,58t St
SNOW, !iLEE I ANU I,LIZ/AI<U 3,92€2a
WIND /t45,661 2,7*EC
I DAHO INCLUDING PREARRANGED 6.938.968 58,26t 1,50!
IDAHO UNDERLYNG 5.632.37!5r,73(1,Ut
IDAHO SAIDI SAIFI 74 0.6t
Note: Direct Causes are not listed if there were no outages classified within the cause during the reporting period.
Page 13 of21
iIOT.nITANROCKY
FOWER Seruice Quality Review
ldaho 2013-June Cause Analysls - SAIDI
r WEATHER I ANtfvtAtS
T TREES
1*r ENVIRONMEI{T
0*
I PI.ANNED
35r
r EqUPMENT
FAItURE
22r$
r NTERFERENCE
516
r 1oSS OF SUPPTY
t9,$
January - June 201 3
2.4,2 Cause Category Analysis Charts
ldaho 2013-June Cause Analysls - SAIFI
r WEATHER I ANIMAIS
E TREES
t%
r E]MRONMENT
M
r PLANNEDxr*
r EqUPMEiIT
FAILURE
tvx
r INTERFERENCE
5tr
r LOSSOFSUPPLY
W
ldaho 2013-June Cause Analysls - lncldentsI WEATHER r AMMA6
8r5E TREEIS
2*r E}MRONMEI{TM3 PI.ANNED
24X ! EQUIPMENT
FA!tURE3fr
r OTHER
1396
r OPEMTIONAL rw OF SUPPTY
4%
r NTERFERENCE
5r
Page 14 of 21
ROCKY MOTJNTAIN
Fcll,YERAffidffi Service Quality Review
IDAHO January - June 201 3
Environment
Contamination or Airborne Deposit (i.e. salt, trona, ash, other chemical dust,
sawdust, etc.); corrosive environment; flooding due to rivers, broken water main,
etc.; fire/smoke related to forest, brush or building fires (not including fires due to
faults or liohtnino).
Weather Wind (excluding windborne material); snow, sleet or blizzard; ice; freezing fog;
frosl: liohtnino.
Equipment Failure
Structural deterioration due to age (incl. pole rot); electrical load above limits;
failure for no apparent reason; conditions resulting in a pole/cross arm fire due to
reduced insulation qualities; equipment affected by fault on nearby equipment (i.e.
broken conductor hits another line).
lnterference
\Mllful damage, interference or theft; such as gun shots, rock throwing, etc;
customer, contractor or other utility dig-in; contact by outside utility, contractor or
other third-party individual; vehicle accident, including car, truck, tractor, aircraft,
manned balloon: other interferino obiect such as straw. shoes, strinq, balloon.
Animals and Birds Any problem nest that requires removal, relocation, trimming, etc; any birds,
squirrels or other animals, whether or not remains found.
Operational
Accidental Contacl by PacifiCorp or PacifiCorp's Contractors (including live-line
work); switching error; testing or commissioning error; relay sefting enor, including
wrong fuse size, equipment by-passed; incorrect circuit records or identification;
faultv installation or construction: operational or safetv restriction.
Loss of Supply Failure of supply from Generator or Transmission system; failure of distribution
substation eouioment.
Planned
Transmission requested, affects distribution sub and distribution circuits; Company
outage taken to make repairs after storm damage, car hit pole, etc.; construction
work, reqardless if notice is oiven: rollinq blackouts.
Trees Growing or falling trees
Other Cause Unknown; use comments field if there are some possible reasons.
Page 15 ol 21
R(XKY MOUNTANFOWER Service Quality Review
IDAHO January - June 201 3
2.5 lmprove Worst Performing Circuits or Areas by Target Amount
ln 2012 the Company modified its program with regards to selecting areas for improvement. Delivery
of tools has allowed more targeted improvement areas. As a result, the Service Standard Program
was modified to reflect this change. Prior to 2012, the company selected circuits as its most granular
improvement focus; since then, groupings of service transformers are selected.
Circuit Performance lmprovement (prior to 1213112011)
On a routine basis, the Company reviews circuits for performance. One measure that it uses is called
circuit performance indicator (CPl), which is a blended weighting of key reliability metrics covering a
three-year period. The higher the number, the poorer the blended performance the circuit is
delivering. As part of the Company's Performance Standards Program, it annually selects a set of
Worst Performing Circuits for targeted improvement. The improvement projects are generally
completed within two years of selection. Within five years of selection, the average performance of
the selection set must improve by at least 20o/o against baseline performance.
Rel iabi lity Performance I m provement (post 121 31 1201 1)
On an annual routine basis, the Company reviews areas for performance. Utilizing a new measure
called reliability performance indicator (RPl), which is a blended weighting of key reliability metrics
covering a three-year period, calculated at the service transformer, for controllable interruptions that
were recorded at the service transformer. The higher the number, the poorer the blended
performance the area is receiving. As part of the Company's Performance Standards Program, it
annually selects Under-performing Areas for targeted improvement. The improvement pQects are
generally completed within two years of selection. Within five years of selection, the average
performance of the selection set must at least 10%baseline
Gircuit Performance tndicator 2OO5 (CPl05) Method
PROGRAM YEAR 12
Grace 12 124 Proiects in oroqress 152
Preston 13 102 Proiects in orooress 80
TARGET SCORE = 90 113 fi6
Region Performance lndicator 2012 (RPl12) Method
PROGRAM YEAR 13.
Mudlake 12 248 Underwav 129
Goshen 13 100 Undenrav 124
TARGET SCORE = 157 174 127
PROGRAM YEAR 14
Berenice 21 Gioure |D-1A-C)290 Studies oendino
Malad 13 (Fiqure |D-2A-C)122 Studies oendino
TARGET SCORE = 185 206
(lmprovement targets for circuits in Program Years 1 through 11 have been met and filed in prior reports.)
' Program Year 13 scores (baseline and performance update) have been modified to reflect underlying performance, excluding
loss ofsupply events.
Page 16 of 21
R(XKY ]IIPUNTAnIPOWERlfficffi Seruice Quality Review
IDAHO January - June 201 3
2.6 Geographic Outage History of Under-performing Areas
6tA8t4rErat!atf,trbtntatitf,a-Ir'.oto!
-a-6aa,aaiEt&tor1,trrtrtaatl
Figure ID-IA: Berenice 2l Controllable View
Figure 1B: Berenice 21 Non-Controllable View
Page17 of21
R(XKY MOUNTAN
Seryice Quality Review
January - June 201 3
6aa,b6ItraIEattE5Dtrr
irt.crl
Figure lC: Berenice 21 Underlying View excluding Loss of Supply
ii
-,1:"t ,It':
- i.1,,.i, i.il;'i," '--. :r.: .5,.. t.j:. ti.:ii,.
. il: . r,
r:r:.) ;..'lr,il.i:;i i
[a-./;i;J ,- :-;-r;.trij./.
{,iil', r
;ltlir;;1.. l';.:!:,; --.i;l':,1:ttlr,. 1'i-Jl;:n-.,::.:. :.:i&:dfi',';-,.;
4ti,.*'fr:'
l3i.:ri r l(t iri.:r..
,l'/r rr r! .r
r ' ^li:
aa-6raIaaItrrD
f,alolatr
Figure 2A: Malad 13 Controllable View
Page 18 of21
R(XKY MOUNfAfil
FOWER Service Quality Review
IDAHO
Figure 38: Malad 13 Non-Controllable View
Figure 2C: Malad 13 Underlying View excluding Loss of Supply
Page 19 of21
January - June 201 3
!tIaaaDaaItraaIIbIEitat!lo5t,tsto-580to
aaao.arEa0ltrrErtrQlort,trrro
ROCKY MOUNTAhI
Seruice Quality Review
IDAHO January - June 2013
2,7 Restore Seruice to 80% of Customers within 3 Hours
2.8 Telephone Seruice and Response to Commission Complaints
January 1 - June 30, 2013 = 89o/o
PS5-Answer calls within 30 seconds
PSGa) Respond to commission complaints within 3 days
PSOb) Respond to commission complaints regarding
service disconnects within 4 hours
PS6c) Resolve commission complaints within 30 days
Page20 ol21
ROCKY MOUNTAINEgm*Seryice Quality Review
IDAHO3 CUSTOMER GUARANTEES PROGRAM
custom erguaranfees
January - June 201 3
STATUS
January to June 201 3
to Billing lnquiries
to lVbter Problems
51,239 0 1000/o
460 0 100%
412 0 100%
132 0 10006
279 1 99.60/o
101 0 100%
5,533 5 99.97o
108,796
882
956
250
502
148
5,384
0 100%
1 99.97o
0 1000/o
0 100%
1 99.8%
0 100o/o
3 99.970
ldaho
cGl
cG2
cG3
cG4
cGs
cG6
cG7
Major Events are excluded from the Customer Guarantees program.
Page21 of21