20160105final_order_no_33445.pdf

Office ofthe Secretary
Service Date
January 5,2016
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF PACIFICORP DBA )
ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER’S )CASE NO.PAC-E-15-14
APPLICATION FOR AUTHORITY TO )
CANCEL ELECTRIC SERVICE SCHEDULE )
NO.71-ENERGY EXCHANGE PROGRAM )ORDER NO.33445
________________________________________________________________________________________
)
On November 20,2015,PacifiCorp dba Rocky Mountain Power (the “Company”)filed
an Application asking the Commission for authority to cancel Electric Service Schedule No.71,
Energy Exchange Program.The Commission issued a Notice of Application and Notice of
Modified Procedure.Staff timely filed the only written comments in the case.Rocky Mountain did
not file a reply.As discussed below,the Commission approves the Company’s request.
BACKGROUND
In response to the western energy crisis of 2000-2001,the Company implemented the
Energy Exchange Program (Schedule No.71),offering its customers an optional program “to
reduce energy usage as quickly as possible.”Application at 2;see also Order No.28628.
Customers who wished to participate had to “execute an energy exchange customer agreement with
the Company,”under which they would “voluntarily reduce their electricity usage in exchange for a
payment at times and prices determined by the Company.”Id.The program was available only to
customers “with a monthly demand exceeding 1,000 kilowatts at least once during the [prior]
twelve-month billing period.”Id.at 2.Participants had to agree to have a Company-provided
meter “capable of recording usage intervals no less than 15 minutes.”Id.
Under the Exchange Program,Rocky Mountain notified participating customers “of an
exchange event when market prices were such that it was economic for the Company to encourage
customers to reduce energy usage.”Id.In such event —called a “curtailment event”—those
customers “had to maintain their electricity usage below the customer’s baseline service for the
duration of the specified event.”Id.at 2-3.
Rocky Mountain purchases an Energy Profiler Online (“EPO”)energy management
product,to help its commercial and industrial customers more efficiently use energy,and monitor
energy usage.Id.at 3,As part of its EPO contract,the Company purchases a “load curtailment
module”which enables it to offer the Schedule 71 Energy Exchange Program.Id.Rocky
Mountain’s current EPO contract expires at the end of 2015.Id.
ORDER NO.33445 1
THE APPLICATION
Rocky Mountain seeks to cancel Electric Service Schedule No.71,the Energy Exchange
Program.In support,the Company cites limited customer participation since the program began.
and a lack of any customer participation since 2008.Id.The Company also notes that no
curtailment events have been offered since 2010.Id.at 2-3.If its request is granted,Rocky
Mountain would stop purchasing the load curtailment module of the EPO program with its new
EPO contract beginning in 2016.Id.at 3.
STAFF COMMENTS
Staff supported the Company’s proposal to cancel the Energy Exchange Program.To
assess whether the program should be discontinued.Staff evaluated:(I)the Company’s currently-
available options for reducing demand in an emergency;(2)historical customer participation in the
program,and prior curtailment events;and (3)customer benefits from incentive payments,and the
program’s costs.Comments at 3.
Regarding options for reducing demand in an emergency,Staff learned that the
Company “has two special contracts with interruption capability in addition to the right to
implement the Irrigation Load Control Program as a voluntary event as needed from June 1 through
September 30 each year.”Id.,cuing Company Response to IPUC Data Request I.Also,the
Company’s updated curtailment plan,currently under review in Case No.PAC-E-15-l0,includes
provisions for emergency load-shedding.Comments at 3.
As to current customer participation,Staff confirmed with the Company that the
program has had limited participation.Only one Idaho customer participated in the program’s
initial offering in 2001,and no Idaho customers have participated since.Id.Outside of Idaho,
seven customers participated in the initial 2001 offering,no customers participated from 2002 to
2004,and two Utah customers enrolled in 2005 then cancelled enrollment in 2008.Id.Currently,
there are no customers participating in the program.Id.Staff further confirmed that there was only
one curtailment event,in 2001.and no other curtailment events offered to Idaho customers.Id.at 4.
Finally,Staff investigated the program’s customer benefits and costs.Staff learned that
customer benefits are received as incentive payments or “exchange credits”based on an “hourly
credit rate”that is multiplied by the customers’“exchange amount”during a curtailment event.Id.
Applying the credit rate to the 2001 curtailment event,the sole Idaho participant received a total of
$9.66 for its participation in the event.
ORDER NO.33445
Examining the program’s costs,Staff asked about the Company’s Energy Profiler Online
(EPO)energy management product.In order to offer the Energy Exchange Program,the Company
purchased the “load curtailment module”as a component of the EPO.Application at 3.The
Company’s current EPO contract expires at the end of 2015,thus the Company proposes to stop
purchasing the load curtailment module with its new EPO contract beginning in 2016.Id.Staff
learned that the annual cost of the Energy Profiler Online (EPO)energy management product is
$85,428,of which the load curtailment module is $19,908 —or 23%of the total cost.Comments at
4.
DISCUSSION AND FINDINGS
The Idaho Public Utilities Commission has jurisdiction over PacifiCorp dba Rocky
Mountain Power,an electric utility,and the issues raised in this matter under the authority and
power granted it under Title 61 of the Idaho Code,in particular Idaho Code §61-129,61-307,61-
503,and 61-622.We have thoroughly reviewed the Application and its attachments,as well as
Staff comments,and find that granting Rocky Mountain’s request is reasonable and in the public
interest.
The purpose of the Energy Exchange Program was to “reduce electric demand during the
energy crisis of 2001,which was triggered by the onset of poor hydropower conditions in the late
spring of 2000.”See Comments at 3.We find that the program was able to achieve modest goals at
its outset,with eight participants in a single curtailment event.Only one of those participants was
an Idaho customer.Although two additional customers —in Utah —participated from 2005 to 2008,
no Idaho customers have participated in the program since its inception,and there are currently no
participants in the program.
We also find that Rocky Mountain has other means in place to reduce electric demand:
two special contracts with interruption capability and the right to implement its Irrigation Load
Control Program.We find that these are two reasonable and adequate alternatives to Schedule 71
for addressing energy emergencies.We also note that the Company has recently requested
Commission approval of updates to its curtailment plan.See Case No.PAC-E-l5-lO.
We further find that the costs of the program outweigh its demonstrated benefits.Over
its 15-year implementation,the only incentive payment in Idaho was a $9.66 payment to Idaho’s
participating customer.The load curtailment module that Rocky Mountain purchases as part of its
EPO contract in order to offer Schedule 71 is $19,908 per year —23%of the total cost of the
Company’s EPO contract.The Company has indicated that it will no longer purchase the load
ORDER NO.33445 3
curtailment module if its request to cancel Schedule 71 is granted.We find that canceling Schedule
71 would benefit Rocky Mountain Power customers system-wide with the Si 9,908 annual savings.
For these reasons,we approve the Company’s request,and authorize cancellation of
Electric Service Schedule No.71,Energy Exchange Program.
ORDER
iT IS HEREBY ORDERED that PacifiCorp’s Application is approved.We grant the
Company’s request to cancel Electric Service Schedule No.71,Energy Exchange Program.
THIS IS A FINAL ORDER.Any person interested in this Order may petition for
reconsideration within twenty-one (21)days of the service date of this Order.Within seven (7)days
after any person has petitioned for reconsideration,any other person may cross-petition for
reconsideration.See Idaho Code §6 1-626.
DONE by Order of the Idaho Public Utilities Commission at Boise,Idaho this 5
day of January 2016.
PAUL KJELLNDER,PRESIDENT
KR INE RAPER,COMMISSIONER
ATTEST:
/
Jean D.JewdlI
COmmission Secretary
O:PAC-E-1 5-14djh2
ANDERSON,COMMISSIONER
ORDER NO.33445 4