20150601Kensok Exhibit 10.pdf

DAVID J. MEYER
VICE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF COUNSEL FOR
REGULATORY & GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
AVISTA CORPORATION
P.O. BOX 3727
1411 EAST MISSION AVENUE
SPOKANE, WASHINGTON 99220-3727
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FACSIMILE: [phone]
[e-mail]

BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION

IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION ) CASE NO. AVU-E-15-05
OF AVISTA CORPORATION FOR THE ) CASE NO. AVU-G-15-01
AUTHORITY TO INCREASE ITS RATES )
AND CHARGES FOR ELECTRIC AND )
NATURAL GAS SERVICE TO ELECTRIC ) EXHIBIT NO. 10
AND NATURAL GAS CUSTOMERS IN THE )
STATE OF IDAHO ) JAMES M. KENSOK
)

FOR AVISTA CORPORATION

(ELECTRIC AND NATURAL GAS)

Avista’s Project Compass
August 2013
Avista Utilities

Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 1 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 1 of 44

Table of Contents
I. Summary……………………………………………………………… 5

II. Avista’s Legacy Customer Information System…………………… 6
Architecture of the System…………………………………………..... 6
Keeping Pace with Change……………………………………………. 8
Additional Benefit of Extending the Life of the System………………….. 11

III. Drivers of the Need for Replacement……………………………… 12
The Role of Technology Evolution……………………………………. 12
A Familiar Example………………………………………………….. 13
Avista’s Chain of Legacy Technologies………………………………… 13
Hardware……………………………………………………… 13
Applications and Computer Languages…………………………… 14
People……………………………………………………….... 16
Other Legacy Considerations…………………………………………... 16
Cost of Modifications…………………………………………… 16
Ultimate Cost of Replacement………………………………….… 17
Platform for the Future………………………………………..…. 17
Summary of the Limitations of Avista’s System………………………….. 18
Options to Extend the Service Life of the System………………………… 18
Timing of the Replacement…………………………………………….. 20

IV. Planning for Replacement of the Legacy System…………………... 20
Replacements of Customer Information Systems are Common…………….. 20
These Projects also Present a Significant Challenge…................................. 21
Identifying Common Challenges…………………………………...…… 22
Designing the Project Around Best Practices…………………………..…. 24
The Initial Project Plan………………………………………………… 26

V. Evaluation of Replacement Options……………………………….... 27
Assessing and Selecting the Replacement Applications………………….... 27
Establishing Review Criteria……………………………………...…….. 29 Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 2 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 2 of 44
Supporting the Application Scoping, Review and Selection Process……….... 29
Application Proposals Received from Vendors…………………………… 30
Evaluating the Proposals……………………………………….……… 31
Functionality………………………………………………..….. 31
Technology…………………………………………………….. 32
Implementation Partner………………………………………….. 32
Cost…………………………………………………………… 32
Avista’s Final Selection of Applications and Service Vendors……………..… 35
Oracle’s Customer Care & Billing………………………………… 35
IBM’s Maximo Enterprise Asset Management……………………... 35
EP2M………………………………………………………….. 36

VI. Implementation of the Replacement Systems………………………. 36
Project Compass Capital Budget………………………………………... 37
Timing of the Final Project Budget……………………………………… 37
The Role of Cost Information Early in the Project………………………… 38
The Project Budget as a Management Tool………………………………. 39
Project Budget Allocation……………………………………………… 40
Application Costs as a Portion of the Budget…………………………….. 40
Board of Directors’ Updates……………………………………………. 41
Principal Implementation Activities of Phase 2…………………………… 41
Key Activities in Phase 3………………………………………………. 44

VI. List of Attachments
Attachment 1 Depiction of major systems interconnected with Avista’s legacy
Customer Information System.
Attachment 2 Request for Information for potential reinvestment in Avista’s legacy
Customer Information System.
Attachment 3 Project charter document for initial work to evaluate options for
replacing Avista’s legacy Customer Information System.
Attachment 4 Project update presented to Avista’s executive steering Committee.
Attachment 5 Request for Information for services in support of the
evaluation of options for replacing Avista’s legacy Customer
Information System.

Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 3 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 3 of 44
Attachment 6 List of vendors who received the Request for Information document
for supporting System evaluation options.
Attachment 7 CONFIDENTIAL – Scoring results from assessment of vendor
proposals, per Attachment 5 & 6.
Attachment 8 Overview document of Avista’s Request for Proposals for vendor
application solutions and services.
Attachment 9 List of vendors who received Avista Request for Proposals, per
Attachment 8.
Attachment 10 Avista Project Compass Guidebook.

Attachment 11 CONFIDENTIAL – Scoring results of the assessments of vendor’s
solution and services proposals, per Attachment 8.
Attachment 12 CONFIDENTIAL – Final solution evaluation workbook, per
Attachment 8.
Attachment 13 CONFIDENTIAL – Voting tallies for final vendor Selections.
Attachment 14 CONFIDENTIAL – Price comparison of final solutions packages.

Attachment 15 CONFIDENTIAL – Final capital budget approved for Project
Compass.
Attachment 16 CONFIDENTIAL – Project update for Avista’s Board of Directors,
February 2012.
Attachment 17 CONFIDENTIAL – Project update for Avista’s Board of Directors,
September 2012.
Attachment 18 CONFIDENTIAL – Project update for Avista’s Board of Directors,
February 2013.

Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 4 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 4 of 44
I. Summary

Avista Utilities (Avista or Company) is engaged in a multi-year effort to replace its legacy
Customer Information System (or System). Research and planning for this effort began in 2010,
and the actual work of replacement, which was named Project Compass (or Compass) was begun
in May of 2012. The Company’s Customer Information System has been in service since 1994,
and has been fortified over time by linking it with nearly 100 other software applications and
systems to keep pace with evolving information technologies and expanding customer
preferences. While this strategy has provided our customers value, the Company has also been
mindful that its ability to continue supporting this aging technology is finite. Between 2003 and
2010, Avista and its technology support partner Hewlett-Packard, assessed options for
modernizing the legacy system in order to reduce business risks and operating costs while delaying
its ultimate replacement. The Company decided in 2010 to commence with the research and
planning needed to support the current replacement initiative. During 2011, Avista selected a
technology partner to assist in documenting technology needs, and in assessing commercial
business applications from leading vendors. Project Compass was formally launched in 2012, and
proceeded with Avista’s purchase of Oracle’s Customer Care & Billing application, IBM’s
Maximo asset management application, and implementation support from EP2M. A final capital
budget was approved for the Project in 2012. The Company and its support contractors are
currently engaged in the implementation of these new systems, which involves the complex
process of enabling them to support over 3,500 business requirements associated with 200
business processes, and to connect seamlessly with 100 other software systems and applications.
In addition, the training programs needed to support these new systems and work processes, are
also being developed and tested. Portions of the Maximo application will be enabled in the fall of
2013, and all other asset management and Customer Care & Billing systems will enter service in
July of 2014. A final Phase of Project Compass will span a period of 6 to 12 months after the
systems are fully in service, to ensure that all technical, training, and process issues that arise are
identified, assessed and timely solved.

Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 5 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 5 of 44
II. Avista’s Legacy Customer Information System
A utility’s Customer Information System is one of the most essential business systems enabling
the organization’s daily operations. For Avista, it supports functions that range from customer
calls, to automated service on the phone system or web, access to electric and gas meter
information, customer billing, outage management, customer work scheduling and status
reporting, ordering construction materials, and managing customer account information. Each of
these activities, and many more, is supported by our highly-integrated Customer Information
System. Developed in the early 1990’s, it’s considered a “legacy” System because it relies on key
technologies that are no longer manufactured, commercially available, or supported. Like the
systems implemented by many utilities of that era, our software applications were designed and
developed by Avista staff, and are often referred to as “homegrown.” The decisions of companies
to ‘self build’ resulted in part from the then-high cost of commercially available software products,
and the desire to tailor systems to their own unique business processes. In 1992, Avista contracted
with Electronic Data Services (EDS) to provide enterprise-wide information technology support,
including the ongoing development of the Customer Information System, which was placed in
service in August 1994.

Architecture of the System
Avista’s legacy System is composed of three highly-integrated applications, also known as the
Avista “Workplace.” As a unified platform, these applications draw information from a common
set of master data tables, and form the technology foundation for a network of complex business
processes and transactions. A brief description of the applications is provided below.

1. Customer Service – application supports the traditional utility business functions of meter
reading, customer billing, payment processing, credit, collections, field requests and
customer service orders. In addition, it hosts the single source of customer-related data that
is used widely throughout Avista for various other business processes.
2. Work Management – this application supports gas ‘trouble’ reporting and the electric
Outage Management System, and is used to create orders for location services, permitting,
and construction jobs, including those requested by our customers and those arising
Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 6 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 6 of 44
through the normal course of construction scheduling and operations. In addition, the
Work Management system is linked with the Company’s Enterprise Procurement System,
part of Avista’s Oracle e-Business Suite, for the automated ordering and proper accounting
of construction materials.
3. Electric and Gas Meter Application – module used to inventory and manage the
Company’s fleet of in-service electric and gas meters. In addition to hosting the meter data
associated with each customer and premise, the system is also used to track each meter and
manage the periodic requirements for meter maintenance and testing.

Avista’s Customer Information System was developed around then state-of-the-art concepts
including ’single source data,’ ‘subject area databases,’ and ‘relational databases.’ These
innovative and powerful tools, based on the ‘relational model’, organized very large sets of data
into a series of normalized tables (or relations). Each table represented a certain type of data, such
as the street addresses where the Company provided service. Data in these tables could be freely
inserted, deleted and edited, and stored much more efficiently than ‘linked’ databases. In this
model, each individual record in every data table was associated with a unique identifier or ‘key’.
This unique key might represent a single service address contained in the table of address data. But
the unique key for this address was also shared by all of the data related to that address that was
contained in all of the other data tables. In this way, a service address was linked with all other
related data for that address, including such information as the date of meter installation, the meter
manufacturer, meter serial number and usage data for that meter, etc.

The System also employed the now ubiquitous ‘client-server’ architecture. But when implemented
in 1994, it was the first utility system in North America to deploy this design. Databases were built
and managed for the mainframe platform using IBM’s DB2 product, and the application program
code was written in the then-mainstream programming language COBOL v2. The COBOL
application routines or programs were developed using the CASE tool “ADW”, created by
Sterling, performed on desktop computers running the IBM OS/2 operating system. The
application was designed for the mainframe operating system known as CICS. Another language,
Smalltalk, was used to create visual interface for computer screens, and employed the innovative
object-oriented programming methodology. Queries of the data tables were enabled by routines
Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 7 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 7 of 44
written in the language known as SQL. This advanced System allowed the Company’s customer
service representatives to efficiently access the mainframe applications, and to query, display, edit
and manage data in object form on their desktop computer screens.

Keeping Pace with Change

The Customer Service and Electric & Gas Meter Applications were enabled in 1994, and
development of the Work Management System application quickly followed. Avista’s Workplace
was initially integrated with three other business systems, as depicted below in Figure 1.

Figure 1. A simplified graphic representing the initial configuration of Avista’s legacy Customer
Information System, showing the three primary applications and integrated systems.

Change to the System came quickly, however, as wave after wave of new information
technologies (such as automated phone systems, powerful mid-range computing platforms, and
customer web portals) enabled an evolving stream of new customer service functionalities,
embedded as standard features in each new generation of applications developed by leading global
vendors. As consumers grew accustomed to these service options in their interaction with a wide
range of other companies, they began to expect these types of services from their utilities. Avista
worked to accommodate these developments, and in addition, added many features to its System to
reduce internal costs by automating paper functions, redesigning work-processes, and providing
self-service options for customers. This expanded functionality (such as payment by phone) was Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 8 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 8 of 44
accomplished by ‘integrating’ the legacy System with the emerging applications and systems that
enabled these new capabilities.

An ‘integration’ refers to the sharing of data between computer applications when more than one is
required to complete a process. In early integrations, data from one application was sent directly to
another application in a direct link known as a ‘point to point’ integration. The integration relied
on a custom computer program to translate the data format and computer language of one
application into a form that could be input into the other application for processing, and vice versa.
This function allowed the two applications to communicate and work in concert to perform a joint
function. Many businesses shared this need to extend the capabilities of the limited architecture of
their information systems, and this demand gave rise to an entirely new software product family
known as “Middleware.” These applications provide communication and management of data for
distributed software applications beyond those available from the computer operating system
itself. Using a Middleware product known as ‘Biz Talk’, the Company was able to cost-effectively
expand the efficiency, capability and functionality of its legacy System, by integrating new
commercial off-the-shelf software, internally developed custom applications, and the application
systems of third-party service providers. For both customers and employees, this approach
seamlessly integrated technologies far beyond the boundaries of the System’s original design
limitations. When the System architecture was designed, home computers were uncommon, the
internet was in its infancy, there were no e-mail services, no automated phone system, few cell
phones, no text or SMS messaging, and no mobile computing, as supported by today’s smart
phones and tablets. Some of the major applications and systems now integrated with Avista’s
Workplace include the following:

• Enterprise Voice Portal – this automated telephone system supports a range of self service
options for customers, as well as voicemail and other functions used by those contacting
the Company and for internal Company operations.
• Mobile Dispatch System – this application supports the call out and scheduling of Avista’s
gas and electric servicemen, and other field staff required to support Company operations.
Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 9 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 9 of 44
• Avista Facilities Management – this application houses the Company’s Geographic
Information System. In addition to map data, it includes all the Company’s electric and gas
facility maps and other geographic data.
• Automatic Meter Reading – this system gathers meter-reading data from the Company’s
fleet of AMR-equipped meters in Avista’s service territories in Oregon, Idaho and portions
of Washington.
• Construction Design Tool – this application supports the Company’s computer-based
design tool for gas and electric construction projects, the automated input of component
assemblies, materials ordering, and cost accounting.
• Outage Management Tool – this application uses Avista’s electric Facility Management
and mapping data, in conjunction with electric system device and circuit intelligence, to
determine the likely source of a reported outage, to display the likely size of the outage, and
to automatically dial affected customers as well as automatically posting outage
information on our customer web portal.
• Mobile Web Application – this application hosts our customer’s access of Avista’s web
portal using smart phones and tablets.
• Electronic Check Payment – this family of applications belongs to banks and third-party
service vendors used by the Company to support payment options for customers.
• Contract Billing – this family of applications supports services such as customer account
management, bill printing, mailing and remittance processing.
• Customer e-mail Support – applications that host e-mail services for our customers, and
provide support applications and services.
• Meter Data Management – this recently integrated system provides the data-storage and
management capability to enable ‘smart metering’ capabilities such as customers’
real-time use of energy.
• Smart Grid Pilot – this portal provides access for Avista customers participating in the
Company’s Smart Grid Demonstration Project.
• Avista Web Applications – this system of applications supports the Company’s internet
website, Avistautilities.com, and enables customers to access and manage their account
information held in the Customer Information System.
Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 10 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 10 of 44
• Avista’s Oracle Financial and Enterprise Procurement Systems – these enterprise
applications support the breadth of the Company’s financial and reporting systems, as well
as a host of enterprise supply-chain functions.

Prudent investments in our legacy system over the past 20 years have allowed us to deliver
consistently-high levels of customer service across an expanding range of service channels and
self-service options. In place of its initial three modules and three system integrations, the current
System supports nearly 200 business processes, and includes approximately 100 integrations with
other specific applications and systems, as depicted in simplified form in Figure 2, below. A more
complete depiction of the interconnection of major systems is provided as Attachment 1.

Figure 2. A simplified graphic representing the integration of Avista’s legacy Customer
Information System with other major applications and systems.

Additional Benefit of Extending the Life of the Legacy System
Avista has invested in its Customer Information System, principally because we could add
functionality and value to better serve customers for relatively small incremental investments. But,
Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 11 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 11 of 44
importantly, this approach also allowed the Company to ‘skip over’ successive generations of
technology platforms, many of which are being replaced by our peer utilities today as they install
new contemporary systems. In addition, the Company was able to evaluate the experiences of
other utilities engaged in replacing their systems, as one way to support the design of a best
practices project. Extending the life of its legacy System has allowed the Company to avoid the
significant investment of replacement, and to acquire replacement systems later in the
evolutionary trajectory of the technology, giving it broader and more standardized capabilities,
and a likely longer future service life.

III. Drivers of the Need for Replacement

As described above, our legacy System meets the basic needs of our stakeholders today because
we’ve made managed investments to extend its value, cost effectiveness and service life. But while
there has been incremental and long-term benefits associated with this strategy, there have also
been less-obvious but important costs and business risks accumulating with time as the technology
platform ages. These latter costs and risks can compete with the benefits of extending the service
life, and the Company has remained aware of the inevitability that our core legacy System and the
very-complex “patchwork” of integration programs supporting other applications, would have to
be replaced.

The Role of Technology Evolution
Over the past twenty years, the rapid evolution of information science technologies has impacted
the life-cycle availability of aging software and hardware products and services, and it has enabled
significant improvements in consumer service capabilities in each new generation of commercial
applications. This rapid cycling of product and service innovation has eroded the foundational
integrity of Avista’s legacy technology. And at the same time, it has pressured us to continue
adding on functionality well beyond the design capabilities of our legacy System.

Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 12 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 12 of 44
A Familiar Example

As a way to illustrate the impact of these technology forces, consider a parallel evolution in
personal music players. In 1980, Sony introduced the revolutionary and highly-successful
Walkman cassette player. Cassette tapes were then dominant, but by the mid-1980s, the Walkman
was redesigned for the new format of compact discs (CD). By 1990, cassette players began to
disappear from store shelves as personal CD players were continually improved. But, like the
cassette tape before, the CD personal music player was doomed when Apple introduced the iPod in
2001. And for some time now, the supremacy of the iPod has been undermined by the iPhone and
other smart devices that can store and play music files, but in addition, can access music via web
streaming or files stored in the computing cloud.

Today, a person might still use a Walkman to listen to music on existing cassette tapes. But to
maintain and expand a cassette music library, requires several electronic components forming a
‘chain of technology’ that’s no longer mainstream. Though cumbersome (by today’s standards),
it’s still possible to perform the steps required to record a new tape, so long as each piece of
equipment in the technology chain is working. And the incremental cost is small, compared with
the alternative of replacing the tape library with digital files purchased from iTunes. At some point,
however, the old equipment will fail. And, because it’s no longer mainstream, it will be
progressively more difficult and expensive to repair. Even the most ardent cassette person will
probably reach the point, where the cost, complexity and limitations are enough to overcome the
inertia of reinvesting in a new music platform.

Avista’s Chain of Legacy Technologies

The complexity of the technology chain supporting the Company’s legacy System is similar in
many ways. The key areas of vulnerability and challenge have to do with older computer hardware
and operating systems, computer applications and programming languages, and the availability of
qualified technical and development support, as briefly described below:

Hardware – As mentioned, our System is based on a mainframe computing platform. This is
because when the system was designed and launched, only mainframe machines had the
Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 13 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 13 of 44
computing horsepower required for its operation. Even though smaller computers have the
necessary capabilities today, the legacy System databases and program applications are entirely
mainframe dependent. In addition, the development application used for making programming
changes to the Company’s System, runs on IBM’s OS/2 operating system that has not been sold or
supported for many years. And the computers that were matched to the OS/2 operating system
haven’t been manufactured for a similar time. For several years after the hardware and operating
system were discontinued, Avista bought used computer components (some from e-Bay auctions)
that were matched with OS/2. More recently, however, the Company uses specialized software
that runs on contemporary desktop computers to “emulate” the OS/2 operating system. This
workaround allows the Company to execute its OS/2-dependent software applications in a
“virtual” OS/2 environment.

Applications and Computer Languages – The legacy software application is the ‘computer
program’ that runs and maintains our legacy system databases, and enables all the features
required to support our business processes. These applications are written in the computer
language, COBOL v2, which for many years has not been sold, supported, or used in programming
applications. This version of COBOL, which we refer to as ‘native’ COBOL, is also no longer
compatible with contemporary mainframe operating systems. To work around this, the Company
has for many years used another specialized application, Micro Focus COBOL, to compile the
native COBOL language into machine language that is a virtual replication of a more
contemporary version of COBOL, which is then able to run on the mainframe operating system.
While the virtual COBOL replication has a very high degree of fidelity with the native COBOL, it
relies on a visual replication that sometimes results in transcription errors. While the error rate is
low, there are millions of lines of computer code that are re-created during the compiling process.
The system must be tested to detect these errors, which then requires additional programming time
to locate and repair them. More recently, there is a concern that the machine language created by
Micro Focus COBOL may not be able to run on newer mainframe operating systems, which now
run COBOL v390.

Avista’s legacy software applications are almost constantly being repaired, modified (to comply
with new requirements), or upgraded with new functionality or capabilities. To accomplish these
Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 14 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 14 of 44
operations requires use of a CASE tool application known as Application Development
Workbench, or ADW. CASE tool applications, whose use peaked in the early 1990s, are tightly
coupled with mainframe programming languages; they enable and help-automate the process of
generating (writing) code in the native COBOL language. The company that produced ADW is no
longer in business, and Avista’s application is neither produced nor supported. In addition, ADW
can only run on the desktop machines using the emulation software to create a compatible OS/2
operating system. Once the coding changes are made in native COBOL using ADW, they are then
compiled using the Micro Focus COBOL application.

Another computer language that’s key to sustaining Avista’s legacy system is known as Smalltalk.
The language is used to create routines or programs that enable many key functionalities of
Avista’s system, including ‘rendering’ the display screens customer service representatives use to
view and manage customer and system data. Rendering is the conversion of lines of computer code
into a visual screen display, which not only allows the user to see account information, for
example, but to also make changes to the data or information contained on the rendered screen.
This functionality is utterly everywhere today, such as the displays on your smart phone, but it was
a very innovative application when designed into Avista’s system the early 1990s. And, Smalltalk
was the leading programming language of its type in that day. Although this language is a very
flexible and powerful tool, it is no longer mainstream, and is no longer sold or supported. Many
versions of Smalltalk are still in use among small communities of users in the computer industry,
but the language is no longer taught in computer curricula and there is no formal training for new
programmers.

Finally, the Company’s customer service and system data residing on the mainframe platform
must be updated every night in what is known as a ‘batch’ program. The batch updates the data
tables to reflect changes in account status made during the day, and to perform other functions
using the data, such as producing customer bills. Like the COBOL routines that enable the
interactive use of the Customer Service application (described above), separate COBOL routines
are required to perform these batch functions. There are approximately 3,000 individual COBOL
programs and millions of individual lines of code in the legacy System. The management, repair
Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 15 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 15 of 44
and modification of these native COBOL programs can only be performed using the ADW and
Micro Focus COBOL applications to both modify and compile them.

People – Maintaining our legacy System requires us to train and maintain technical staff
competent in these older programming languages and computer operating systems. This is
becoming more difficult as the availability of business analysts and application developers who are
familiar with these languages and technology becomes more limited each year. This attrition of
skilled developers makes it very difficult to replace members of Avista’s support team, many of
whom grew up with this technology when it was new, and who either have retired, or are
anticipated to do so in the next few years. Since there is no longer technical training or schooling
available for these old languages and systems, the Company must train developers in house, which
requires a considerable investment to achieve proficiency. It’s also difficult to channel younger
employees into career tracks that have very-limited and diminishing future application. As a
consequence, the need to find, train, and maintain capable technical staff adds another layer of
complexity, cost and risk to the maintenance of these legacy Systems.

Other Legacy Considerations
Each of the elements above focuses on an aspect of the Company’s System that poses a level of
risk greater than that associated with contemporary hardware, operating systems, technical
support, and business applications. Avista’s situation is not unique, however, and illustrates the
general technology principle shared by many legacy systems: that even though they may require
complex workarounds to perform their intended functions, which many can do adequately, they
are subject to elevated levels of risk that only compound with time. In addition to increasing
business and customer service risk, there are other considerations associated with the maintenance
of legacy systems like Avista’s.

Cost of Modifications – In addition to the risks associated with outdated technology, the System is
difficult to modify to add new functionality. This arises because the linkages connecting the
applications of Avista’s Workplace, along with the Middleware that connects Workplace with the
other applications and systems, are ‘hardwired’ together. Unlike contemporary enterprise
applications, when a programming change is made to one of Avista’s applications it requires Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 16 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 16 of 44
complimentary programming changes to both the connecting Middleware and the other
applications themselves. Because the system has been stretched over time so far beyond its
original design considerations, these layers of changes have geometrically increased the
complexity of the entire system. Each new modification must be adapted to this complexity, and at
the same time, it adds to the complexity. Additionally, because the legacy System is used only by
Avista, the ongoing application development costs must be borne entirely by our customers.

Ultimate Cost of Replacement – As Avista added new capability to its legacy System, as described
above, this required ‘programming’ to modify the software applications to enable the business
processes supporting this new capability. When the legacy System is replaced, the new
applications must be ‘programmed’ to support the same integrated systems and business
processes. Generally, then, as the number of integrations in the legacy System increases, so does
the cost, complexity and the degree of sophistication required to install the replacement system.

Platform for the Future – In addition to the costs and risks of extending the service life of Avista’s
legacy system, and the complexity and cost of adding functionality, its ultimate capability has been
largely exhausted. The System was designed as a meter-based billing system that provided the
Company an efficient and cost-effective platform for managing a customer’s basic transactions. In
this respect, the system is more ‘business centric’ because it was designed around the transactional
needs of the business. This is not surprising, though, since at the time the System was developed,
the transactional convention consisted of customers receiving a paper bill, which they paid with a
personal check sent by mail, or in person at one of Avista’s offices. Utility customers, generally,
had no expectation of being involved in energy choices or service options, which likewise, were
rare. Today’s information technologies and the market demands for service differentiation have
swept aside the business-centric service model and placed the ‘customer centric’ model front and
center. Consumers today have an ever-increasing expectation of being able to conduct business
with all manner of companies in ways they, the customer, prefer (e-mail, text, chat, phone), at the
time they determine to be convenient (24 x 7 x 365), and to have one point of contact to
seamlessly, quickly and efficiently meet all their needs. As capably as Avista’s System has
performed in the past, it simply does not have the fundamental capabilities required to provide
customers the service options they have come to expect in the customer-centric marketplace. In
Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 17 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 17 of 44
addition, the legacy system cannot support the newer utility product offerings becoming more
familiar to customers, such as real-time information management, pre-pay options and time-of-use
metering and billing. Some enhancements viewed by customers today as “basic service” (e.g. text
messaging or selecting their preferred mode of contact – phone, text, SMS or e-mail), simply
cannot be accommodated.

Summary of the Limitations of Avista’s Legacy System

The Company’s legacy System is dependent on expensive mainframe computing platforms, even
though today’s mid-range computers have the capability needed to support the applications. It also
depends on many obsolete technologies that require complex workarounds to function properly.
And the workarounds themselves depend on obsolete systems and applications working properly
in concert to enable them. As a consequence, maintaining the system involves risk that grows as
the technology ages, and requires expert staff and trained contractors who remain competent in
these archaic technologies. Making changes to the System is complex, burdensome, and
expensive. But unlike the inconvenience of having to repair a broken cassette player , Avista’s
system is the hub of business operations for over 600,000 customers, and it must operate flawlessly
on a continuous basis. Finally, though the System still operates adequately, there are finite and
insurmountable limits to its ultimate ability to provide the technology platform that’s needed to
serve our customers today and into the future.

Options to Extend the Service Life of the System
Periodically, Avista and its support partner, EDS/Hewlett-Packard, have evaluated the System’s
capabilities as well as options for its possible modernization. The potential scalability of the
Customer Information System was assessed in 1999 to determine the feasibility of expanding the
number of customers that could be served with then-current applications, processes and technical
infrastructure. The results of this work titled “Avista Workplace Application Scalability
Assessment,” indicated that with certain investments, the system would be able to support up to
1.5 million customers. As the number of customers served by Avista continued to grow at
generally-historic rates, the system investments needed to support greater scalability were neither
needed nor made. In 2002, as some of the technologies supporting Avista’s System, such as ADW,
were becoming unsupported, an assessment was made, titled “Avista Application Migration Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 18 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 18 of 44
Review”, of the feasibility of moving the Company’s system from the mainframe platform to a
contemporary mid-range platform and operating system. The benefits of such a process,
commonly known as ‘replatforming’, were forecast over time and were compared with the
estimated costs for completing the work. Results of this work indicated that replatforming the
System at that time was not cost effective, and as a result, this work did not proceed. The next
assessment was made in 2003 and focused on ways to reduce the risk associated with the ADW
application then running on aging desktop computers using the IBM OS/2 operating system. The
project report, titled “ADW Conversion”, recommended Avista purchase the specialized software
to emulate the OS/2 system on contemporary computers and operating systems. This
recommendation was implemented. The legacy System was reviewed again in 2006 as part of a
larger information technology review conducted for the entire Company. The report, titled
“Preliminary Applications Rationalization Assessment”, addressed the overall rationalization
potential across the Company, and identified any ‘modernization’ opportunities for specific
applications. The term “rationalization” refers to an information technology discipline that’s
aimed at reducing the ongoing costs of maintaining overlapping or redundant software systems
across the whole of the business. The report noted the Company’s Customer Information System
as a ‘high risk’ application that was a candidate for either replacement or “refactoring.” The latter
refers to a process of changing the internal structure of the existing application code to reduce its
complexity and improve its readability. While this process helps reduce the risk associated with
legacy software, it does not fundamentally change its basic properties or architecture. Refactoring
the Customer Service System was assessed as not having sufficient benefit, and the Company was
not ready to replace the System. Most recently, in 2010, the Company again reconsidered
reinvesting in its legacy System as means to delay its ultimate replacement. As a prelude to
requesting vendor proposals to support such an effort, the Company sent a Request for Information
to several major information technology vendors to describe the legacy System, and to gauge their
interest in participating in possible next steps. A copy of the document, titled: “Request for
Information for Avista Workplace Revitalization Project” is attached to this report as Attachment
2. As Avista continued to weigh the possible feasibility of this approach, it ultimately determined
that commencing with the research and planning for the current replacement project was the
prudent course of action.

Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 19 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 19 of 44
Timing of the Replacement Avista’s decision to replace its legacy System involved a number of considerations, many of which
have been described above. Considered in concert, these helped shape the decision to commence
with the research and planning necessary to support this effort:

• Confidence that Avista could operate the legacy system without fail through at least 2014,
without any significant upgrades to older technology. This timeframe would accommodate
the period of research, planning, design and implementation of a replacement project;
• Avista expected to have a limited window of availability for the employee and contract
technical resources necessary ensure the proper functioning, maintenance, repair, and
upgrades of the legacy system expected through 2014;
• The pending need to determine whether or not to renew the long-term (ten years) services
contract with Hewlett – Packard for the ongoing mainframe capability, and the
maintenance and operations support for the legacy system. The end of the then-current
contract presented a window of opportunity for replacing the legacy system;
• The experience that the Company had practically tapped the capabilities of its legacy
system, whether or not it was operating on contemporary computer hardware and software;
• The concern that business and service risks associated with the legacy system were
continuing to accumulate with time;
• The continuing assessment that as new functionality was added to the legacy system, it was
driving geometrically-increasing complexity, and likely greater ultimate replacement
costs, and
• The knowledge that the legacy system would not have the capability to deliver some of the
service and billing options our customers desired, or service and work-process options.

IV. Planning for Replacement of the Legacy System

Replacements of Customer Information Systems are Common
Nationwide, many utilities have undertaken the same journey in replacing their own legacy
Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 20 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 20 of 44
Customer Information Systems, and many are replacing systems installed around the year 2000, a
‘generation’ newer than Avista’s System. Several utilities in the Northwest are among those
engaged in some phase of a major replacement project. Avista’s understanding of the status of
these efforts is summarized below:

Cascade Natural
Gas & Intermountain Gas
OR/WA/ID
Currently using Oracle’s Customer Care & Billing application in
Oregon and Washington, which replaced their prior system installed in 1999. Planning to install this system in their Idaho service area in late 2014-2015.
Northwest
Natural Gas OR/WA Now in the process of evaluating potential for upgrades and/or
WA
Portland General
Electric OR information and meter data management applications, expected
Idaho Power ID
PacifiCorp ID/OR/WA
Seattle City Light WA

These Projects also Present a Significant Challenge

Replacing a customer information system is a major undertaking for any corporation. And, it’s
particularly complex for an integrated business, such as a utility, that manufactures it own
products, constructs and maintains its own distribution and delivery infrastructure, and that often
sells more than one energy product in the highly regulated markets of sometimes multiple state
jurisdictions. The degree of interconnectedness of the customer information system with the many
other business systems and applications supporting the enterprise, is a key driver of the challenge.
In addition to the complexity of these systems, there’s significant workload associated with the
steps of planning, evaluating, selecting, implementing and testing the new systems, as well as
training employees and informing customers in time for a smooth transition. In addition,
successful projects have a high degree of executive engagement and commitment, superb
information technology competence, a deep knowledge of the company’s work processes – both Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 21 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 21 of 44
current and potential future states, and proven experience with the implementation of enterprise
information technology projects. The confirmation of these challenges lies in the failure rates
reported for these projects, in the range of 40% to 60% over the past five years. In these cases,
“failure” was judged as a project that was either abandoned, or that failed to substantially meet its
project goals – in terms of cost, solution expectations, implementation timeline or operational
readiness.

Identifying Common Challenges

As part of its initial project research, Avista contacted several utility peers who were in various
stages of the process of implementing new customer information systems. In an effort to evaluate
their preparation, approaches and performances, Avista conducted in-depth interviews to gather
lessons learned from these utilities, which included El Paso Electric, San Jose Water, Green
Mountain Power and Los Angeles Department of Water and Power.

In addition, the Company took advantage of shared industry knowledge related to the changing
demands being placed on utility customer information systems, the maturation of technology
solutions, and project audits1 that assessed root causes of the failure to successfully implement
new systems. What emerged from that collective work was a pattern of challenges that had caused
many projects to be less than successful. Taking advantage of the opportunity to learn from the
experience of others helped Avista prepare, with eyes wide open, for the challenges of replacing its
Customer Information System. Some of the central issues the Company and others identified as
problematic are included in the list below.
1. Executive involvement that was either distant or faded over the term of the project.
2. Sponsorship of the project that was weak or diffused because there were necessarily so
many departments involved in the project.
1 Focused Management and Operations Audit of Kentucky Utilities Company and Louisville Gas and Electric
Company. Final Report presented to The Kentucky Public Service Commission. Liberty Consulting Group,
September 12, 2011. Performance Audit of the Customer Care and Billing System: Testing Prior to Go-Live. Office of the Auditor, Austin,
Texas. September 21, 2011. Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 22

Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 22 of 44
3. Project management that lacked the applicable experience and strong skills needed to
establish a realistic, comprehensive and sustainable plan for the administration of such a
large and complex information technology project.
4. Expectations established too early in the project for the ultimate project cost, scope and
timeframe, which rendered them unachievable.
5. In spite of the involvement of many departments, project leadership that was often ‘tilted’
toward either the information technology aspect or the business processes.
6. Research to identify best practices and peer-lessons learned that was either inadequate or
ineffectively built into the project.
7. Inventory of business requirements that was not complete or that lacked sufficient detail.
8. Business requirements that were not effectively translated into a complete understanding
of the application capabilities required to support them.
9. The expertise and effort needed to perform comprehensive evaluations of vendors and their
proposals, related to due diligence, project scope and confirmation, was insufficient.
10. Selected vendor solutions often were not complete without additional customized
development, which drove added complexity and costs.
11. Implementation support from third-party contractors that had little familiarity with the
systems being purchased from the software vendors.
12. Inadequate code testing by the vendor prior to installation in the utility environment.
13. Test environments that did not fully replicate production.
14. The tendency to customize the product solution to better match the existing business
processes of the organization, rather than working to implement the solution as designed.
15. An organizations’ resistance to re-design work processes to comport with the architecture
of the new solution.
16. Inadequate test team involvement.
17. Inadequate training, education and organizational change management programs to help
employees accept and perform competently in new work processes and systems.
18. Going Live with the new systems before the business was fully prepared and production
ready.

Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 23 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 23 of 44
Designing the Project Around Best Practices

While alarming in some respects, the challenge experienced by many utilities is also not entirely
surprising. The process of selecting and implementing a new customer information solution is
complex enough by itself, but it is also commonly joined, like Avista’s, with the implementation of
new asset management or other software systems, and many other work processes. It’s also outside
a utility’s core competency, and it can occur only once in a generation. The degree of challenge
and failure has, not surprisingly, given rise to a range of business services whose purpose is to
reinforce the capabilities of companies like Avista in the technical and project management skills
identified as areas of potential weakness. Avista selected several of these specialized vendors as
part of its application selection and implementation processes. Some of the key project-design
decisions made by the Company are listed below.

• Established a steering committee of senior executives, meeting monthly with the project
directors, to provide executive oversight on all aspects of the design and implementation of
the replacement project.
• Made the executive decision to implement what is referred to as “off the shelf” vendor
applications, with a commitment to minimize the number of Avista-specific
customizations. This approach, while it demands that significant changes be made to the
Company’s existing business processes during the replacement, helps ensure our
customers benefit from the periodic application updates to be provided by the vendor
without bearing the cost of the additional software programming that would otherwise be
required to accommodate the volume of customized computer code. This approach, which
is more mainstream today, is diametric to the approach common when the Company’s
legacy System was designed and built in house and was carefully tailored over the years to
match our existing business practices.
• Created an Avista project leadership structure with two co-directors serving as executive
leaders of the effort: the director of customer service, representing the Company’s business
processes, and the director of application systems programming, responsible for the
information technology aspects. The intent of this structure, although potentially ungainly,
was to overcome a common failing of projects to ‘overweight’ one aspect of the project to
Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 24 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 24 of 44
the detriment of the other. In addition, both project managers are dedicated full time to
Project Compass.
• Hired an outside expert in change management as a Company employee to work full time
developing and implementing a communications and change management plan for the
project. Avista learned this function was critical to successful companies’ efforts to
substantially change work processes that accompanied the adoption of off the shelf
applications.
• Hired an outside firm to assist the Company in developing a solutions Request for
Proposals, in soliciting, comparing, and evaluating proposals from an array of options and
potential vendors, and in selecting and purchasing the vendor applications. In Avista’s
research, this was an area of key challenge for utilities because even the process of
understanding the totality of its ‘business requirements’ was a barrier, let alone the
challenge of assessing whether a vendor’s application had the full capability to support
these requirements.
• Ensuring the vendor selected for supporting the implementation of the customer service
and asset management applications, and in seamlessly linking them together, had direct
experience and extensive familiarity with the applications selected.
• Retaining an outside project manager with significant expertise and experience
implementing enterprise-wide utility software applications – being assigned the broad
responsibility for the overall implementation process, including the coordination of project
leaders representing the vendor applications selected and those who would be selected for
quality assurance monitoring and system testing.
• Identifying and securing the full-time participation of key employees who would be
needed full time for the project.
• Securing dedicated office space located away from the distractions of Avista’s day-to-day
operations, and having ample office and meeting space for all project leaders, employees
and contractors associated with the project.
• Retaining the services of an outside firm specialized in creating training programs for new
systems, development of the curricula, training the trainers, and evaluating the
effectiveness of the training effort.
Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 25 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 25 of 44
• Planning for an employee communication program that would be part of the foundation of
the Company’s change management effort for Project Compass.
• Anticipating the service changes that would arise for customers associated with the new
System, and planning for the communications effort that would accompany the Go-Live.
• Waited to establish a final project budget until the planning, preparation and scope had
been well enough defined to successfully manage the project.

The Initial Project Plan
The Project was envisioned to be completed over a four-year time horizon, with a substantial effort
dedicated to pre-project research and planning. Figure 3, below, depicts the high-level activity
phases of this initial plan.

Figure 3. Depiction of the high-level phases of activity envisioned for the Project to replace
Avista’s legacy Customer Information System.

The first Phase of the Project, known as “Selection/Procurement,” encompassed the activities of
mapping Avista’s business process needs and developing the detailed business requirements for
requesting and evaluating alternative sets of software and system solutions that would best meet
those needs. This Phase would conclude with the Company selecting the optimized solution set,
negotiating final pricing, and signing the purchase agreements with vendors.

Known broadly as “Implementation,” Phase 2 encompasses the complex activities of installing
and configuring the new vendor software, testing the new systems, and developing and delivering
the specialized training modules for the new Systems. ‘Configuring’ a software application
involves the programming required to code its generic capabilities to execute the steps needed to
Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 26 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 26 of 44
match each of the Company’s work processes. In addition, there are many Avista process steps that
cannot be executed within the generic capability of the new applications, without customization.
This involves the addition of customized programming that is outside the bounds of the ‘off the
shelf’ capability of the application. Significant customization renders the process of installing the
periodic vendor updates of the applications, both complex and expensive. Avista is committed to
capturing the value delivered by ‘off the shelf’ implementation, and accordingly, our goal is to
minimize the need for customization. What this requires, however, is that Avista organize
employee teams to accomplish the significant tasks of developing new internal business processes
that can be supported by new application. There is also a significant volume of work required to
perform the ‘programming’ to integrate the new vendor applications with the approximately 100
other applications and systems required to support the Company’s customer service and allied
business operations. This Phase of the Project also encompasses the development of employee
training programs and systems for the new applications, and the extensive testing of the system
needed to confirm the technical performance of the new applications as configured to Avista’s
design. Finally, this Phase concludes with the step of placing the new Systems into service, the
“Go-Live.”

The third Phase, known as “Post Go-Live Support,” encompasses the activities associated with
supporting the in-service deployment of the new systems. Key activities include development of
contingency plans to respond to issues that may arise during the Go-Live, and providing technical
support for the new systems in the period referred to as “system stabilization.”

V. Evaluation of Replacement Options

Assessing and Selecting the Replacement Applications
An early step in the work of Selection/Procurement was development of a project charter, which is
included as Attachment 3, and outlines the high-level work objectives, some of the key
deliverables, and authorizes an expense budget to support these activities. A presentation made to
the executive steering committee in April 2011, includes a partial listing of the Project drivers,
highlights of Avista’s Project research, some key elements of the Project design, planned next Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 27 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 27 of 44
steps, and some very-preliminary Project capital costs. This presentation is included as
Attachment 4. Later in 2011, the Company named this effort, “Project Compass.”

The next key step focused on selecting and retaining a firm to support Avista in developing the
following work products:

1) Complete inventory of Avista’s technical business process requirements;
2) Inventory of the types of business process decisions to be made;
3) Gap analysis;
4) Request for Proposals document for technology solution providers;
5) Normalized evaluation and vetting of vendor proposals;
6) Selected preferred solution set, including due diligence and scoping;
7) Formal purchase offer for acquisition of vendor services, and
8) Negotiated final purchase price for applications and integration services.

Avista developed a Request for Information to document the services of interest and to gauge the
interest of candidate firms, which is included with this report as Attachment 5. The list of firms is
provided in Attachment 6. The Company solicited, reviewed and scored proposals from the
participating firms, and a summary of the scores used in making the selection is included as
Confidential Attachment 7.

Avista selected Five Point Partners (Five Point) to support its Selection/Procurement activities.
Among other criteria, the Company placed emphasis on their proprietary ‘STAR’ methodology for
identifying every type of major business process requirement that Avista would need from solution
and application vendors to support its future business operations. This ‘requirements’ definition
allowed the Company to develop a detailed and specific Request for Proposals from candidate
solution providers. Understanding the detailed requirements translated to a more complete
understanding of the complexity and cost of the solution sets, as well as understanding up front the
activities and applications that would be required for successful implementation, including their
costs, and foreknowledge of what parties would be responsible for the associated workload and
costs.
Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 28 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 28 of 44
Establishing Review Criteria
Global criteria were developed and vetted for use in evaluating vendor proposals. These criteria
included: 1) Functionality; 2) Technology; 3) Implementation Partner, and 4) Cost. With the help
of Five Point, Avista used the inventories of its business process and decision types to create the
Request for Proposals from candidate solution vendors. The solicitation packet was reviewed and
refined in several rounds and sent to vendors on September 28, 2011. An overview document of
the Company’s Request for Proposals for CIS (customer service) and EAM (asset management)
solutions, is provided as Attachment 8. A list of vendors who received the Company’s solicitation
is included as Attachment 9. An initial step in the vendor’s process of evaluating and responding to
Avista’s proposal solicitation was a conference call opportunity to ask Company representatives
detailed questions about its current and anticipated business practices, processes and systems.

Supporting the Application Scoping, Review and Selection Process

During the process of developing its Request for Proposals, Avista launched a parallel effort,
known as ‘current state mapping’, needed to support the design of the Project. This is a
comprehensive inventory and evaluation of each of Avista’s existing customer information system
work processes and system requirements. The purpose of this work was to clearly understand,
from a global perspective, every single work process in the business and the applications and
systems involved in supporting those activities. In Avista’s view, the current state represented a
picture of how custom-designed and integrated information technology solutions had been
introduced over time to support the Company’s legacy service paradigm and work processes. The
current-state map included over 200 work processes and over 3,500 individual process steps or
system requirements. These process steps represented the necessary technology functions required
to support the existing business processes. While these 3,500 requirements were much too detailed
to be included in the Request for Proposals, the Five Point STAR process did identify the solution
capabilities the vendors would have to meet in order to support Avista’s future requirements and
business operations. A summary document prepared by Avista, titled “Project Compass
Guidebook”, is included with this report as Attachment 10, and provides a detailed overview of the
complex activities required to support both the procurement of application and service vendors, as
well as the detailed process organized to support and execute the current state mapping.
Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 29 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 29 of 44
Application Proposals Received from Vendors

Avista received responses from vendors on October 28, 2011, and with the help of Five Point,
immediately began the review and evaluation process. The table below lists the vendors who
responded and the solutions and roles they proposed for delivering a solution set to Avista.

Most of the responding vendors proposed a complete solution, which included three applications:
customer service; asset management; and mobile work management. These vendors, including
IBM, EP2M, Wipro, HCL AXON and Sparta, proposed to deliver the complete solution through
the primary service known as Systems Integration. This involves the installation of system
software applications that are developed and sold by leading global software companies such as
SAP, Oracle and IBM, and the integration of these software applications with the other
Vendor
Product or Service
Offering
Customer
Information System
Application
Enterprise Asset
Management
Application
Mobile Work
Management
Application
Other
Vendors
IBM Systems Integration
SAP Customer
Relationship &
Billing (CR&B)
SAP Enterprise Asset
Management (EAM)
ClickSoft Mobile
Work Management
(MWM)---
IBM
Systems Integration &
Software Applications SAP CR&B
IBM Maximo Asset
Management ------
EP2M Systems Integration
Oracle Customer
Care & Billing
(CC&B)
Oracle Asset
Management Oracle MWM ---
Wipro Systems Integration Oracle CC&B IBM Maximo
Ventyx Service
Suite ---
HCL AXON Systems Integration SAP CR&B SAP EAM ClickSoft MWM
Technology
Associates
HCL AXON Systems Integration SAP CR&B
Meridium Asset
Management ClickSoft MWM
Technology
Associates
HCL AXON Systems Integration SAP CR&B IBM Maximo ClickSoft MWM
Technology
Associates
Sparta Integration Services SAP CR&B SAP EAM
Ventyx Service
Suite Vesta Partners
Logica Software Application ---
Logica Asset
Management ------
Meridium Software Application ---
Meridium Asset
Management ---
Partners with
Wipro
HPES Systems Integration ---------
General
Services Only
Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 30 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 30 of 44
information and process systems of the Company. One vendor, IBM, proposed options where it
either provided systems integration services for the software applications of others, including SAP
and ClickSoft, or a package that included its own software application (Maximo). HCL AXON
proposed to deliver a complete solution set from three options that included various combinations
of software application systems. Two vendors, Logica and Meridium, proposed to deliver and
install only their own software applications, and one vendor proposed only installation and
integration services (no solution applications).

Evaluating the Proposals

In its initial review, Avista’s Project Compass team and Five Point evaluated and scored each
proposal according to more-detailed criteria, grouped under the four global Project criteria, as
represented below:

1. Functionality

a. Minimum Requirements – Degree the solution vendor met the minimum functional
capabilities established by Avista. A scoring sheet for this portion of the evaluations is
attached to this report as Confidential Attachment 11, pages 1 - 3.

b. Project Drivers – Degree to which the proposed solution met the system requirements
identified in Avista’s STAR analysis. Scoring sheets for this portion of the evaluations are
attached to this report as Confidential Attachment 11, pages 4 - 21.

c. Customer Service Fit – Measure of the functionality of the Customer Care, relationship,
and billing systems with respect to Avista’s needs. Scoring sheets for this portion of the
evaluations are attached to this report as Confidential Attachment 11, pages 22 - 28.

d. Enterprise Asset Management Fit - Measure of the functionality of the asset management
systems with respect to Avista’s needs. Scoring sheets for this portion of the evaluations
are attached to this report as Confidential Attachment 11, pages 29 - 32.

Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 31 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 31 of 44
e. Mobile Work Management Fit - Measure of the functionality of the mobile work
management systems with respect to Avista’s needs. Scoring sheets for this portion of the
evaluations are attached to this report as Confidential Attachment 11, pages 33 - 38.

2. Technology

a. Technical Fit – Evaluation of the technical hardware and software needs and costs, and
technology implications of the proposals, with respect to Avista’s core information
technology strategies, in the short and long-term. Scoring sheets for this portion of the
evaluations are attached to this report as Confidential Attachment 11, pages 39 - 50.

3. Implementation Partner

a. System Integrator Capabilities – Assessment of the vendor’s implementation strategy,
installation approach, capabilities, timeliness, staffing, and compatibilities with Avista’s
project plans. The scoring template and assessment notes for this portion of the evaluations
are attached to this report as Confidential Attachment 11, pages 51 - 59.

4. Cost

While a vendor’s proposed cost was an important element of the initial screening, Avista
understood the limitations on the usefulness of these initial costs. Not only were these costs
very preliminary, but they did not necessarily represent the package of solutions the
Company would select, did not represent the results of final price negotiation, and did not
reflect with any degree of accuracy the final cost estimates that would be developed later in
the process. The initial costs for each proposal are included in Confidential Attachment 11,
pages 60 - 61. Avista’s very preliminary estimate of its costs to implement each proposal
are included on page 60 of Confidential Attachment 11. The budget line just under the
heading titled “Implementation Costs” was the initial very-preliminary estimate of the
collective costs to implement each package.

Based on the initial review and scoring of the proposals by the Avista Project Team, the Company
withdrew consideration of the proposals made by Wipro, Sparta, Logica, Meridium and HPES.
Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 32 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 32 of 44
Avista then conducted day-long interviews in early December 2011 with the final vendors who
fully-met the RFP requirements. A Summary Score sheet for the application solution sets from
each vendor is attached to this report as Confidential Attachment 11, page 62, The summary scores
do not include the evaluations of the capabilities of the System Integration vendors themselves.
The remaining vendors, HCL AXON, EP2M/Oracle and IBM, were invited to make Product
Demonstrations for the Avista Compass team at Avista’s offices, conducted over a period of three
weeks in January of 2012.

During and after the product demonstrations, Avista and Five Point conducted further evaluations
of the vendor proposals rated against a more-detailed list of the Project Compass Drivers, provided
below. As Avista’s evaluation proceeded, a ranking of the elements of the proposals was created
from the aggregation of selections of individual Compass team members. Results were rolled into
a Final Solution Workbook where scores for the proposed software applications (customer service,
asset management, and mobile), the technology assessments, and the evaluations of system
integration vendors were summarized on the basis of meeting the Project Drivers.

Project Compass Drivers

• Technology
o Agile – ability to respond quickly to the ever-changing needs of the business
o Reduce technology complexity
o Strong technology roadmap
o Minimizes customizations
• Customer
o Communication preferences
o Choices – service options
o Improve customer touch points
o Develop new ways to deliver more value to the customer
o Improved information (business analytics) access and availability
• Future
o Smart Grid
o Energy Efficiency Programs Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 33 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 33 of 44
o Real time billing
o On-bill financing
o Strong product roadmap
o Customer experience
• Employee
o Employee impact – positive benefits
o Minimize adverse impact to employees
• Business
o Business process efficiency and effectiveness
o Trusted System Integration relationship
o Strong System Integration implementation approach, methodology and experience
o Preserves data integrity
o Meets project budget, scope and timeline
o Eliminate silos of information
o Improved information (business analytics) access and availability
o Satisfies current regulatory and business requirements

The Final Solution Workbook is included in this report as Confidential Attachment 12, and records
the numeric scores derived from the initial evaluation of the vendor proposals.
• Results reflect a slightly higher ranking of SAPs Customer Relationship & Billing solution
compared with Oracle’s Customer Care & Billing solution, as shown in Confidential
Attachment 12, pages 3 - 4.
• IBMs Maximo Enterprise Asset solution was ranked as having a slightly better match for
Avista than either the SAP or Oracle Asset solutions, as shown in Confidential Attachment
12, pages 5 - 7.
• Among the Mobile applications, the Ventyx solution was rated higher than the Oracle and
ClickSoft solutions, as shown in Confidential Attachment 12, pages 8 - 9.
• With respect to the vendor’s overall Technology scores, as determined by Avista’s
Technology Project Driver, SAP was rated substantially above both Oracle and IBM, as
shown in Confidential Attachment 12, pages 10 - 13.
Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 34 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 34 of 44
• In rating the capabilities of the Systems Integrator vendors, from Avista’s perspective,
HCL AXON was rated above EP2M and IBM, as reflected in Confidential Attachment 12,
pages 14 - 15.

Avista’s Final Selection of Applications and Services Vendors

In Avista’s final analysis, it determined that the best overall combination of solutions for serving
its customers would be a hybrid of the solution sets proposed, including the Oracle Customer Care
& Billing solution, installed and integrated by EP2M, and the IBM Maximo Asset Management
solution installed and integrated by IBM, in partnership with EP2M. In addition, Avista
determined it was in the interest of its customers to delay the selection and implementation of the
Mobile application at that time, since a new version of the top-scoring Ventyx Service Suite will
be available for review in 2014. Final voting scores for the candidate customer and asset solutions,
the lead solution integrators, and the combined projects, are included in this report as Confidential
Attachment 13

Oracle’s Customer Care & Billing application was ultimately selected over SAPs customer
application because it met all the solution requirements needed to serve our customer and business
needs, is more tailored to utility industry applications, was much more intuitive for customers and
our employees to navigate and use. It is also compatible with Avista’s existing Oracle financial
and procurement systems. Because SAPs Customer application could not be integrated with
Avista’s Oracle financial system, selecting SAP would have required Avista to abandon its Oracle
ERP system and to transition to SAPs system over a period of approximately five years.

IBMs Maximo Enterprise Asset Management solution was selected over the applications of SAP
and Oracle because it was judged to have the strongest overall capability for Avista, is an industry
leader, integrates well with Avista’s geospatial facilities technology, provides for the
incorporation of fleet, facilities and enterprise technology assets, and provided the opportunity for
early installation of Avista’s electric generation assets. In addition, IBM was willing to partner
with EP2M in the installation and integration of its Maximo product.

Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 35 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 35 of 44
EP2M was selected as the System Installation/Integration vendor because it has a great depth of
familiarity and experience with the Oracle Customer application, has an excellent track record of
successful project completion, received excellent customer reviews, has very low employee
turnover and has excellent utility experience.

This combination of vendors and solutions, together, was judged to provide Avista and its
customers with the optimized products and services that would deliver excellent service and value,
in both the short and long term, and at the lowest overall price. During the final selection process,
Avista prepared a comparison of the very preliminary pricing, as derived through the course of the
evaluation process, for Avista’s selected solution, as well as the second choice solution set (HCL
AXON and SAP). These prices were very preliminary because the final pricing for the selected
solutions had not yet been negotiated. In addition, because these costs did not reflect all of the
activities involved in replacing the legacy System, they were not intended to represent a budget
estimate for completing the Project. The costs used to compare the final solution sets are included
as Confidential Attachment 14.

VI. Implementation of the Replacement Systems

Avista’s initial project research and its planning work with Five Point Partners, to assess its
business process requirements and to evaluate a range of proposals, provided the base of
knowledge and certainty needed by the Company to proceed with the replacement of its legacy
System. Avista entered final negotiations with the selected vendors, described above, and executed
purchase agreements in May 2011. The single largest contract was awarded to the firm EP2M for
implementing the Oracle Customer Care & Billing application, and integration with the IBM
Maximo application and the host of other applications and systems required to support Avista’s
customer service and operations business. Avista’s second-largest contract was signed with IBM
for its Maximo software and the services of installing and integrating the application. Avista’s
Master Services Agreement and Statement of Work for IBM is also provided as confidential work
papers.

Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 36 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 36 of 44
Project Compass Capital Budget
A final project budget was developed over the course of 2011 and 2012, for the implementation of
the Company’s customer service and asset management applications. This budget was approved
by the Company’s executive steering committee on December 6, 2012, and is included as
Confidential Attachment 15.

Timing of the Final Project Budget

Although Avista discussed potential costs of the project early in its inception, and approved
preliminary budgets through the course of Project development, it did not establish a final capital
budget until the Project was well-enough defined to do so with confidence. Avista has learned
from its own experience, through its peer utility interviews, and from the support and advice of
outside experts, that organizations commonly undermine the success of their software projects by
making cost commitments too early in the development stages. This mistake undermines
predictability, increases risk and project inefficiencies, and generally impairs the ability to manage
a project to a successful conclusion. Early in the scoping of a software project, particular details of
the application being designed/installed, a detailed knowledge of the Company’s specific business
requirements, details of the solution sets, the management plan, identified staffing needs, and
many other variables are simply unclear. Accordingly, estimates of the potential cost of the project
are highly variable. As these sources of variability continue to be investigated and reduced, the
project uncertainty decreases; likewise, so does the variability in estimates of the project cost. This
phenomenon, widely discussed in the literature, and often associated with author Steve
McConnell2, is known as the “Cone of Uncertainty,” presented in Figure 43, below.
2 Software Estimation: Demystifying the Black Art. Steve McConnell, Microsoft Press, 2006 3 id. Figure 4.2, 96.1/751. Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 37

Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 37 of 44

Figure 4. The ‘Cone of Uncertainty’ describing the relationship between the variability in the
estimates of a software projects’ cost and the stage of the project at which the estimates are
developed.
As the figure illustrates, significant narrowing of the uncertainty generally occurs during the first
20-30% of the total calendar time for the project. The uncertainty will only decrease, however,
through active and deliberate project research and design required to further define the scope,
requirements, implementation details and estimates of component costs. And, this uncertainty
must continue to be constrained throughout the course of the project by the use of effective project
controls.
The Role of Cost Information Early in the Project
The decision point for the Company in 2010, was whether to significantly reinvest in its legacy
technology, as the means to defer its ultimate replacement, or instead, to invest in the planning and
exploration of options needed to support its current replacement. In moving toward the latter, the
Company’s focus was to assess its needs, evaluate options, and select a set of solutions that would
meet the long-term needs of the Company and its customers at the lowest possible cost. At that
point, the Company engaged in the progressive stages of project design needed to prudently define
Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 38 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 38 of 44
its likely scope and potential cost. Through this work, uncertainty around the project was narrowed
and potential costs were further refined, to the point that Avista was confident purchasing the
selected applications and proceeding with the work of implementation. Even though this was
several months before the final budget was approved, Avista had by this time built the foundation
needed to initiate a successful project: the ability to deliver a solution that would meet its
long-term customer service and business requirements in an optimized approach, and in a manner
that would achieve the least cost for its customers.
The Project Budget as a Management Tool

While Avista believes its estimates of scope, timeline and budget for the project are reasonable,
and it is committed to control the Project to best meet each of these estimates, it is also cognizant
that its success will not be defined by whether or not each estimate, including the budget, is
precisely met. In contrast with a ‘not-to-exceed’ metric, the software budget is a management tool
that allows senior leaders to make informed enterprise-level decisions, and that provides an
effective tool for the project manager to control project activities in an effort to meet the estimates
of each deliverable (timeline, scope, functionality and cost). In describing the relationship between
software project estimates and final results, McConnell states:

“The primary purpose of software estimation is not to predict a project’s outcome; it is to
determine whether a project’s targets are realistic enough to allow the project to be
controlled to meet them.”4 “Typical project control activities include removing noncritical
requirements, redefining requirements, replacing less-experienced staff with
more-experienced staff, and so on.”5 “In practice, if we deliver a project with about the level of functionality intended, using about the level of resources planned, in about the time
frame targeted, then we typically say that the project "met its estimates," despite all the
analytical impurities implicit in that statement. Thus, the criteria for a "good" estimate
cannot be based on its predictive capability, which is impossible to assess, but on the estimate’s ability to support project success…”6
Avista believes it has designed and developed such an implementation plan and budget for Project
Compass. By this, we mean that the overall Project record will demonstrate its proper research and
design, robust planning and estimating, effective management and controls, and that its delivered
scope, timeline and cost, are reasonable, cost effective and prudent.
4 id. At 42/751. 5 id. At 39/751. 6 id. At 41/751. Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 39

Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 39 of 44

Project Budget Allocation

The overall allocation of the final capital budget for the Project is shown in Confidential
Attachment 15. The budget amounts represent key purchases and contract and employee labor
required to support the activities of installation. In addition, these costs are also separated for each
major application system: Customer Care & Billing; Maximo for Generation Resources, and
Maximo for Gas and Electric Transmission and Distribution assets.

Application Costs as a Portion of the Overall Project Budget

Today, the cost to purchase the rights to enterprise commercial applications is a relatively small
proportion of the overall replacement project budget. This is because the vendor’s cost of
developing and updating these huge applications can be spread across a broad global client base.
Accordingly, the incremental cost to each company is relatively small. To achieve this broad
applicability, the software applications are designed with a standard off-the-shelf range of
functionalities, which allows them to be adopted by the widest possible client base. But, since
every company still has unique business processes within these broad templates of standard
functionality, the applications are designed with significant additional flexibility that is not
configured when the application is purchased. This configuration must be performed by each
company after the application is purchased and installed, in the ways that best meet their individual
business requirements. For Avista, as described above, tailoring the applications to meet our 3,500
individual business requirements involves a significant labor cost. In addition, the customer
service and asset management applications must be integrated to perform seamlessly with each
other, and with every other business software application (over 100 for Avista) that’s required to
support the operations of the Company. Finally, for each existing Avista work processes that
cannot be accommodated by the standard functionality of the new applications, this work process
must be re-designed so that it can. This process re-design is also labor intensive because it’s
performed by work teams staffed with employees representing every segment of the business
that’s impacted by the change. Overall, these costs of installation, configuration, integration and
work process re-design represent the lion’s share of the project budget.

Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 40 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 40 of 44
In addition to the activities above, there is a broad range of other support required to make the
Project successful. These include development of training materials for employees on the new
systems and the re-designed work processes, the process of training, project change management,
employee and customer communications, project quality assurance, computer hosting and
computer hardware for the applications, and providing technical support for the new systems at
their launch and during the period of stabilization.

Board of Directors Updates on Project Compass

The Finance Committee of the Board of Directors was provided an overview and update on the
progress of the Project by Mr. James Kensok, in February 2012. A copy of that presentation is
included as Confidential Attachment 16. Mr. Kensok provided another update to the Board
Finance Committee in September 2012, and that presentation is provided as Confidential
Attachment 17. The Board Finance Committee received an updated progress report on Project
Compass, made by Mr. Kensok, in February 2013. A copy of that presentation is included as
Confidential Attachment 18.

Principal Implementation Activities of Phase 2
As briefly described above, the major activities of the Implementation Phase include installing the
software solutions and configuring them with Avista’s System, testing all of the System
components prior to deploying the solution, developing and implementing employee training and
customer and employee communications. And, finally, the Go-Live placement of the new System
into service. Some of the key activities include:
• Tailor / Configure the software solutions to match the design of Avista’s business
requirements.
• Develop Technical Specifications – These ensure the software configurations can be
documented for future development and upgrades.
• Develop / Configure Work Processes – documents how the Company has determined that the
flow of work processes will be accomplished using the new software.
• Develop Integrations – to connect with Avista’s other business systems and applications.
Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 41 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 41 of 44
• Develop Data Migration Plans – to move Avista’s customer and other data to the new
platforms.
• Security Setup – Establishes the security plan for protecting the Company’s customer and
other data.
• Test Scenarios – developing test scenarios from an inventory of the processes to be tested,
using the step-by-step procedures for each particular transaction or business process that will
be used to integrate and test new systems.
• Conduct Unit Testing – unit testing ensures that underlying customized portions of the
software systems are functioning as designed.
• Migrate Data Tables and Files – to ensure there is order and accuracy when information is
moved from the programming stage into the testing stage and, finally into live application.
• Evaluate System Test Application – the performance testing of the system created for testing
the actual applications and their integrations.
• Conduct Systems Integration Testing – focuses on the testing processes between the software
solutions implemented, and the Company’s other systems, including third party systems.
• Conduct User Acceptance Testing – provides those who will actually be using the systems to
evaluate all application functions related to their business processes. Acceptance testing
confirms the system meets business requirements, and also, verifies the business processes for
the software solution are complete, well understood, and well documented.
• Defect Management – During each test cycle, actual test results are compared with expected
results. If issues are identified and logged, functional and/or technical updates will be made as
required to resolve a particular issue. As issues are resolved, additional testing is completed to
validate that the issue is fixed properly. The majority of this testing falls within the test cycles
outlined above, but additional testing is completed as required by the project team until all
business requirements, system functionality, integrations and business processes are fully
tested.
• Training Materials are created for employees and others who will be using the system.
• Train the Trainer courses are conducted for employees who will be key trainers for others. Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 42 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 42 of 44
• Deliver Training – Training is one of the final opportunities to prepare employees to operate
the system with the new business processes. The timing of the training is critical so that the
users are trained in time for the transition, but will still retain knowledge of the new system.
• The project team develops the detailed “cutover plan”, to ensure a comprehensive list of
supporting requirements is timely developed. ‘Cutover’ refers to the process of moving
Avista’s service from the legacy operating systems to the new applications and systems.
• Ensuring that the technical operating environment for the new is in place and stable prior to the
Go-Live.
• An assessment of organizational readiness is conducted to ensure the Company is equipped for
a successful Go-Live.
• In conjunction with preparing for the Go-Live, a contingency plan will be developed and in
place to respond to issues that may arise during the process.

In addition to the major activities listed above, the work in this Phase is also organized and
managed in several project ‘workflows’ that provide a unified objective and continuity across this
Phase. These six workflows include:

• Overall project milestone plan – this body of work supports the management of the overall
project.
• Enterprise Asset Management / First Wave – this effort is focused on the application of the
new asset management software to Avista’s electric generation and substation equipment.
• Enterprise Asset Management / Second Wave – this portion of the project encompasses the
activities required to apply the new asset management software to the Company’s electric
transmission and distribution, and its natural gas infrastructure. This work process replaces
the functionality currently provided by Avista’s legacy work management and electric and
gas meter application systems.
• Customer Service Application – This portion of the program, which represents the lion’s
share of project Compass, is focused on replacing the functionality of Avista’s legacy
customer service system.
Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 43 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 43 of 44
• Testing – This workflow is focused on the technical testing of the new applications, as
integrated into the Company’s business environment. Activities include the technical
testing of the software and hardware systems, and what is known as user-acceptance
testing. The latter involves Company employees testing the new systems by simulating all
possible combinations of their business application.
• Enterprise Technology – Ensuring the new applications mesh technically and strategically
with the Company’s enterprise services model for information technologies.
• Organizational Change Management and Communication – This work involves the
preparation of employees for their successful participation in work process redesign
efforts, and for the systemic changes they will experience when the new systems are
implemented. In addition, there is an important element of this work that is focused on the
customer: preparing them in advance for the minor service changes that will accompany
the launch of the new systems.

Key Activity in Phase 3
After the Go-Live, there is a transition when supporting consultants remain on site to help resolve
technical issues that arise, in the Phase known as Post Go-Live Support. The duration of this
transition period, which is expected to last between 6 and 12 months, will be defined by Avista’s
internal support personnel as they become comfortable supporting the new system.
Avista’s Project Compass Overview Page 44 Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 44 of 44
IBM Global Services – Energy & Utilities
IBM Confidential © 2009 IBM Corporation1
Conceptual Business System Model – CIS/EAM
Billing
Management
Oracle Fin.
Customer
Management
WEB, EVP
Outage
Management
Network
CSR
EVP
Web
SmartGrid
Operations
Managed Meter
Solution Customer BillAMI SmartMeter
(metering & device management)
Managed MDM Solution
Customer Service Channels
Meter Data
Management
Meter
Data
Analytics
Outage
Data
Outage
Restoration
Status
Work
Management
Demand
Management
(DSM)
Distribution
Management
(DMS)
Dynamic
Pricing data
Load
Management
Data
Supply Chain
Management
Online Bill
Presentment
Enterprise
Asset
Management
Service Provision
Meter
Management
Operations / SG Legacy functions
Distribution
Management
OMS/DMS
Managed
OMS/DMS
Solution
Residential and C&I
CDT
Customer
EMS/HAN
CIS
CIS
AMR SmartMeter (ID)
(metering & device management)
CIS/EAM
MWM
Attachment 1
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 1 of 1
November 6, 2009
RE: Request for Information for Avista Workplace Revitalization project

Dear Consultant:
Avista desires to update its legacy application that comprises its Customer Service System (CSS) Work
Management System (WMS) and Electric and Gas Metering Application (EGMA) for asset management.
This Request for Information letter (“RFI”) outlines Avista’s current situation and is requesting sufficient
specific information to value various options regarding the upgrading and re-platforming of these various
systems. From the information gathered under this RFI, a Request for Proposal (RFP) will be developed
for a specific set of alternatives. Additional discussions may be held with respondents to refine the
alternatives before the RFP is completed and released.
It is Avista’s intention under this RFI to solicit information regarding alternatives to extend the life of
Avista’s existing CSS, WMS and EGMA applications as further explained in this RFI. Upon conclusion
of this RFI, it is Avista’s intention to send out an RFP with the information gathered under this RFI for
further detailed information regarding Consultant’s qualifications, skill set, company information, etc.
with the intention of selecting a vendor to perform the re-platforming of Avista’s CSS, WMS and EGMA
applications.
Avista’s CCS, WMS and EGMA applications were developed in the same development and execution
environment. They are mission critical and highly integrated systems both with each other and other
enterprise applications.
The applications execute in both online and batch environments. The online application is delivered to
approximately 300 users across roughly 30 locations. The batch system executes in a traditional IBM
z/OS JES environment, using CA 7 to schedule and execute JCL and COBOL programs. Development for
the batch system uses an outdated code generation tool, Knowledgeware’s ADW. The online system is
front-ended by a Visual Age Smalltalk client that ties to a DB2 backend through a small number of CICS
transactions calling a number of COBOL subprograms providing a data access layer. Details are provided
below.
There are a significant number of smaller pieces of functionality and integrations at multiple levels. This
functionality will need to be supported natively or migrated to updated environments.
Avista requests information on the various alternatives to extend the life of this system. We require an
environment that would support an eight year life span with reasonable investment in on-going sustaining
work. We are initiating this project to reduce on-going expense in the execution environment (hosting
costs) and revitalize the software platform. Alternatives could include re-siting or re-platforming the
system in any layer to support easier development or execution environments. For example, a migration
from DB2 to Oracle, the primary database for all Avista’s other execution environments might be
proposed.

Attachment 2
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 1 of 5
Request for Information
System Revitalization Page – 2
Additional information regarding Avista’s current system for your reference in responding to this RFI
includes the following Functional Requirements:
7x24 Operations with a nine hour weekly maintenance window
1:1 Functional Equivalence including inter-system integrations with no end-user retraining required
Current system
DYL280

Attachment 2
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 2 of 5
Request for Information
System Revitalization Page - 3
Data access layer facts
Database Facts

Please note that this RFI contains information that is confidential and proprietary to Avista. Consultant
shall under no circumstances use the information contained herein for any purposes other than the
evaluation of the requirements of this RFI and the preparation of a response to this RFI. Consultant agrees
to not disclose the information contained in this RFI to any third parties and shall limit the distribution of
this RFI to any third parties and shall limit the distribution of this RFI to those employees of Consultant
who have a need to have access thereto for the purposes of evaluating the requirements of the RFI and
preparing a response thereto. Consultant shall employ the same degree of care in preventing the
unauthorized release of the information in this RFI to a third party (or parties) as it uses with regards to its
own confidential information, provided that in no event shall Consultant employ less than a reasonable
degree of care and Consultant shall inform its employees of the foregoing obligations. Likewise, Avista
agrees to employ the same degree of care in preventing the unauthorized use of the information supplied
by Consultant in response to this RFI to a third party (or parties) as it uses with regards to its own
confidential information and Avista agrees to inform its employees of the foregoing obligations as well.
Additionally, any costs and expenses that may be incurred in connection with the preparation and
submission of a response to this RFI shall be the responsibility of Consultant.
If your company is interested in participating in this RFI, please contact Pat Dever on or before November
18, 2009 with the purpose of (1) confirming that we have the right contact information for your firm and
(2) to ensure that those planning to respond can be communicated with to receive any supplemental
information or clarifications which might be issued prior to the proposal due date. Meetings will be
scheduled during the days of November 19th – 30th
We appreciate your time and attention to this matter and look forward to hearing from you soon.
for a conference call to discuss Consultant’s questions
in response to this RFI.
Sincerely,
Stacey M. Levin
Senior Contract Manager Corporate Contract Services Avista Corporation

Attachment 2
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 3 of 5
Vendor List
RFI No. R -36462
For Workplace Revitalization project Due November 19, 2009 to begin discussions

Oracle Thiago Sachs
[e-mail] HP
Bob Marshall [e-mail]
Microsoft Andrea Dunn
[e-mail]
and
[e-mail];

Alliance Data
Jim Will [e-mail]

Jacob Miller
Sr. Client Representative
IBM Sales & Distribution office 206-587-6775
mobile [phone]
[e-mail]
Accenture 161 N. Clark
Chicago, IL 60601 fax: [phone]
Trey Thornton
[e-mail]

Attachment 2
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 4 of 5

WI Pro Aravind Kamath
[e-mail]

Freddy Yendrembam
Energy & Utilities Practice HCL Technologies Ltd.
[e-mail] Infosys
Sales & Marketing [e-mail]
Accent Business Services
Jeff Tomkins
[e-mail] or
Dave Chaney
[e-mail]
Fujitsu America
[e-mail]
September 8, 2010: NO AWARD notices were sent to the following vendors on 09/08/10 per Pat Dever’s request:
1. [e-mail]
2. [e-mail] and [e-mail] 3. [e-mail] 4. [e-mail]
5. [e-mail] 6. [e-mail]
7. [e-mail]
8. [e-mail]; 9. [e-mail]
10. [e-mail]
Attachment 2
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 5 of 5
INITIATION PROJECT CHARTER
1. General Project Information
Project Name: CSS Replacement Market Analysis – CSS Replacement Initiation Phase
Project Sponsors: Jim Kensok, Don Kopczynski, Roger Woodworth
Steering Committee: Christy Burmeister-Smith, Jim Kensok, Don Kopczynski, Kelly Norwood,
Jason Thackston, Roger Woodworth,
Project Manager: Jana Leaf (oversight by Pat Dever and Vicki Weber)
2. Accounting

Type Mark One
Capital Project
O&M Project X

3. Project Definition
What is the product or service? Work with internal stakeholders and external consultants to review
the current options for Commercial off the Shelf software replacement for our legacy Customer Service System with an eye
towards replacement of our Work Management System and Electric and Gas Meter Application.
Who benefits? How? Avista will benefit from Initial Phase by learning what options are
available to meet our current and future business needs. Avista and its customers will also benefit by replacing legacy mainframe
system that is obsolete (20 year-old technology) and has limited functionality to meet our future customer needs. Software
development resources are becoming more difficult to secure (COBOL, CICS, Small Talk), thereby increasing the risk associated
with operating & maintaining this system as a core Customer Service and Billing System of our business.

We will consider an abbreviated
process if we are able to select an
existing platform strategy. This
process could change steps 3 – 5.

1. Hire consultant(s) to assist in:
Deliverables:
a. Developing business and technology requirements
b. Evaluating alternative commercial packages
c. Conducting evaluation criteria workshops
d. Examining optionality for segmenting customers
e. Evaluating data mining tools
2. Business case for replacing CSS
3. Completed and issued RFP: purchase of an application and integration/implementation services
4. Completed software demonstration workshops
5. Vendor selected for: application, integration and implementation
6. Comprehensive Project Charter for the replacement of CSS
7. Preliminary project budget and plan for approval by
Steering Committee
Attachment 3
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 1 of 3
4. Resources Information
Estimated Resource Time Required for Scenario Analysis
Which group(s) and/or individuals will be involved in this project?
Role (e.g. Developer, Analyst, Network
Engineer)
Company, Department or
Team
Hours needed
Analyst / PM Customer Service 360 (40 hrs X 9 Scenarios)
Analyst / PM Operations 120 (40 hrs X 3 Scenarios)
Analyst / PM Rates 40 (40 hrs X 1 Scenarios)
Analyst / PM Meter Shop 40 (40 hrs X 1 Scenarios)
Analyst / PM Collections 40 (40 hrs X 1 Scenarios)
Analyst / PM Billing and Payments 40 (40 hrs X 1 Scenarios)
Analyst / PM Finance/Accounting 40(40 hrs X 1 Scenarios)
Analyst / PM Enterprise Technology 160 (16 hrs X 10 Scenarios)
5. Project Details
Proposed Start date: 2/1/2011 Proposed end date: 12/31/2011
Enter anticipated project implementation cost: (with comments where appropriate)
Cost of labor (existing staff) $33,600 840 hrs X 40 – Avista staff from various areas of the company
Cost of labor (new staff or contract) $20,000 Architecture/Platform/Integration review
Cost of Hardware $0 No hardware purchase within Phase 1
Cost of Software $0 No software purchase within Phase 1
Other Costs $300,000 External consultants and site visits;
Total Cost: $353,600
Enter total post-implementation costs
Estimated Cost (Maint.) $0 Over # of years: Na
Estimated Cost (Other) $0 Over # of years: Na
Major Known Risks (including significant Assumptions)
Avista resource availability
Other competing projects such as Smart Grid and Performance Excellence
Constraints (List any conditions that may limit the project team’s options with respect to resources, personnel, or

O&M funding in 2011
Attachment 3
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 2 of 3
5. Sign-off
Name Signature Date
VP / Controller Christy Burmeister-Smith
VP / CIO Jim Kensok
VP Operations Don Kopczynski
VP Regulatory Kelly Norwood
VP Finance Jason Thackston
VP Energy Solutions Roger Woodworth

6. Notes or Additional Information
Typical Scenarios Types
1) Search & Navigation
2) Customer History
3) New Premise Development
4) New Residential Service
5) Rate Definition & Management
6) Meter Management & MDM
7) Billing & Payments
8) Workflow: High Bill Complaint
9) Severance & Collections
10) Technology Requirements

Planning Timeline – Note: Updated timeline will be provided by the Consultant we partner with for the initial phase.
Typical Timeline Key Tasks Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Develop business and technology requirements
Evaluate alternative commercial packages
Conduct evaluation criteria workshops
Business case for replacing CSS
Complete and issued RFP: purchase of an application
and integration/implementation services
Complete software demonstration workshops
Vendor selected for: application, integration and
implementation
Comprehensive Project Charter for the replacement of
CSS
Preliminary project budget and plan for approval by
Steering Committee
2011

Attachment 3
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 3 of 3
CIS Project Update
Executive Steering Committee
April 1, 2011
Attachment 4
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 1 of 11
DRAFT Discussion Document
Why Replace CSS?
Current support staff is tenured; limited resources in the market to support
our custom legacy system
System is 17 years old and is currently written in obsolete program
languages (Smalltalk & COBOL)
Legacy billing system can’t accommodate new products, programs and
services the utility will offer with Smart Grid
Legacy billing system is highly customized. Hierarchy of payments is very
costly to realign required commission rules and regulations. Contract
billing does not exist.
Lack of Customer segmentation, optional enrollment programs, limited
ability to collect customer data and no customer relationship management.
Legacy system is premise based which makes it difficult to follow the
customer.
Integration is limited and costly to our legacy system.
1
Attachment 4
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 2 of 11
DRAFT Discussion Document
CIS System Replacement Journey
Change Management is Key
Approximately 3000 common functional and technical requirements
Approximately 200 business processes to document
Gap Analysis performed to define future state
Configuration and Integration
Training and documentation
Conversion and cut over
Attachment 4
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 3 of 11
DRAFT Discussion Document
CIS Project Timeline
Attachment 4
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 4 of 11
DRAFT Discussion Document
Project Staffing Critical to Success
El Paso CIS Project Team
One Service, Two States, Delayed Collection
Attachment 4
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 5 of 11
DRAFT Discussion Document
Project Management
Attachment 4
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 6 of 11
DRAFT Discussion Document
Successful Steps to Implementation
Industry tier one software solution (Oracle or SAP) on standard technology
platform
Package enabled re-engineering of business processes
Limited customizations (vanilla)
Clear business vision with organizational buy-in from top down around
people, scope, budget and timeline.
Staffed with best and brightest resources
Strong project management support
Early communication around change management, training and strategy
starting on day 1
Phased approach: 1-Design & software selection; 2-System integration
and configurations; 3-Quality Assurance, test, assess and launch
Become risk adverse by limiting all competing priorities. (CSS lock down
on 9/1/2011)
On time and on budget project with minimal interruption to our business.
Attachment 4
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 7 of 11
DRAFT Discussion Document
Progress to Date
Charter Approved
Five Industry leading consultants responded to RFI, scoring completed
Interviewing two additional consultants
Visit to El Paso Electric to discuss CIS implementation of Oracle by PWC
Attended Chartwell Webinar Best Practices in CIS Implementation
Janna Leaf and DJ Kinservik currently documenting 200 business
processes
PAR for 10 CSR’s in process (awaiting approval)
Attachment 4
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 8 of 11
DRAFT Discussion Document
Next Steps
Hire Project Manager
Approval to invite El Paso Director of Customer Care and CFO Executive
Sponsor to share their experience with the Officer team.
Interview Five Point and Black and Veetch Consulting
Select and engage consultant for design and software selection
Build proposed project org chart with approval to commit our best and
brightest employees
Proposed and approved 3 year capital budget plan for $40-$60M inclusive
of CIS/WMS/AM, space allocation, technology, Avista FTE backfill and
consultant support, attorney (internal and external for contract support)…
Request commitment to move forward
Attachment 4
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 9 of 11
DRAFT Discussion Document
El Paso CIS trip Summary
Very strong executive support (previously lost $17.5 million and failed CIS
project)
2 Dedicated El Paso PM’s
Customer communication around bill format was biggest challenge
Training was company wide (many application and screen changes)
Change Management from Day 1
No parallel systems due to reconciliation complexity
April to August –no customer collections. Wrote off $3.9M. Focused on
getting the bills out first.
SLA’s and metrics not captured in one repository to date
Aging report not tied to GL
Minimal involvement from finance caused major account issues.
Short resources overall
Contract was not clear around data conversion
Attachment 4
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 10 of 11
DRAFT Discussion Document
El Paso CIS trip Summary…cont.
Technology risk for installation of CC&B was minimal except for ESB
Net metering billing failed. Still not billing 94 customers
116,000 project hours (they estimated Avista will be 225,000 project
hours)
Business analyst can configure the system without programming
assistance.
TIBCO Enterprise Service Bus was key to their success around integration
Stopped all other projects and focused on CIS
When System Integration started implementation, 90% of IS staff was
consumed on project
No staff reduction as a result of the project. To Do’s
15 months in phase one, 17 months in implementation.
Brought in outsourced call center due to extensive training (14 days of
training for each rep)
Attachment 4
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 11 of 11
Attachment 5
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 1 of 4
Attachment 5
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 2 of 4
Attachment 5
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 3 of 4
Attachment 5
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 4 of 4
Vendor Information for CSS Replacement RFI: Phase One
RFI No. R-37173 Note: Highlighted vendors responded
1. Vertex, Inc. [e-mail]
2. Black and Veatch Corporation
Renee Koch
[e-mail]

3. Five Point Partners, LLC Rich Charles, Sales Manager
[phone]
[e-mail] Address:
2526 Mt. Vernon Road
Suite B348 Atlanta, Georgia 30338
[e-mail]
[phone] Toll Free

4. PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLP (formerly BearingPoint) [e-mail]

5. Bridge Strategy Group, LLC Robert Zabors
[e-mail] Address: Bridge Strategy Group
One North Franklin Street Suite 2100 Chicago, IL 60606
Phone [phone] Fax [phone]

6. Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC, formerly Bass & Co.)
Theresa Skorupa
973-243-7360 [e-mail]
Address:
3170 Fairview Park Drive Falls Church, VA 22042 USA
1-703-876-1000
7. Heights Consulting (partnered with Jericho Consulting)
Attachment 6
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 1 of 1

CONFIDENTIAL

Scoring results from assessment of vendor proposals, per Attachment 5 & 6

Pages 1 through 2

Attachment 7
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 1 of 1
Avista Corporation
RFP R-37440
Avista is seeking Proposals for qualified information system solutions consisting of the complete
functionality of a Customer Information System (CIS) and an Enterprise Asset Management (“EAM”)
Avista has elected to issue this single RFP rather than separate RFPs for each functional system.
However, Solution Provider(s) may respond to one, several, or all of the requested functional systems based upon Solution Provider(s) area of expertise and/or desire to form partnerships with
other providers. In the final analysis, Avista reserves the right to select proposed solution components that are the best fit for its needs.
(also known as a Work Management System (“WMS”). These functional areas and
specific requirements are explained more fully later in this RFP. Avista is seeking a fixed priced
Proposal for conversion, testing, training, implementation, post-implementation, software, and hardware (collectively, the “Enterprise Solution”).
The new Enterprise Solution (also referred to as the CIS and EAM Solution) must be
professionally installed, must be integrated or highly interfaced and will provide enhanced functionality and the ability to interface with other third party applications.
OPTIONS
This RFP will consider the following solution alternatives:
1. A complete Enterprise Solution consisting of CIS and EAM functionality. These
Proposals may be for fully integrated solutions, or they may be for best of breed solutions
that are highly interfaced (a “Partnered Solution”).
2. A solution consisting only of CIS. However, the Solution Provider must demonstrate
successful integration with EAM solutions at utilities similar to Avista.
3. A solution consisting only of EAM. However, the Solution Provider must demonstrate successful integration with CIS solutions at utilities similar to Avista.
SUMMARY OF RFP SCOPE OF WORK
Several key system and service related components have been identified to achieve Avista’s stated business objectives. The total effort outlined in the RFP calls for a complete Enterprise
Solution. The Enterprise Solution consists of the following components:
• Customer Information System (CIS)
The new CIS solution will include all software and services required to implement and support the stated interfaces and traditional CIS functions such as customer service, account management, credit and collections, service orders, meter inventory, usage, billing, service
address management, portfolio management, rates, and financial based activities. The
Enterprise Solution will include utility specific Customer Relationship Management (CRM) functionality.
• Enterprise Asset Management (EAM)
The new EAM will include all software and services required to implement and support the
stated interfaces and traditional work management and asset management functions such as work initiation, work planning, work approval, work scheduling, work execution, work closing, and work reporting. Avista seeks a system that will accommodate typical utility
generation, transmission and distribution operations. Avista is not seeking inventory and
Attachment 8
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 1 of 3
procurement functions, only the integration to those functions in Avista’s Oracle eBusiness
financial suite. The new EAM will also include asset maintenance and management
functionality including analytics and metrics.
• Mobile Workforce Management (MWM) System
Avista’s current CSS interfaces to ABB-Ventyx Service Suite version 8.1 mobile data system. With the new CIS solution, Avista is considering a new, fully integrated MWM system for all orders generated out of CIS. A later phase may include integration with the
new EAM for the long-cycle work that is currently generated out of WMS. As an alternative, if the proposed solution does not include a fully integrated MWM solution, the Solution
Provider must factor into the solution the time and expenses to fully interface ABB-Ventyx
Service Suite with the proposed CIS solution
• Data Access Solution
.
Avista is seeking access via a standard set of tools to the CIS and EAM application data for reporting and analysis. The data access solution will include all hardware specifications,
software and services required to implement and support application query and reporting
within both the CIS and EAM. However, Avista is not seeking an Enterprise Information Management (EIM) or to replace our current Cognos Enterprise Business Intelligence (BI)
solution
• Full Integration
.
The new CIS and EAM will contain full integration between the various modules in each of
the solutions. The new systems will also facilitate efficient and effective integration to other Avista systems. There must be a clear approach to master data management supporting both
internal integrations as well as external system integrations through industry standard
methods.
• Partnered Solution Approach
If this is a Partnered Solution, Avista requires that one of the Solution Providers assume responsibility for the complete solution implementation as the Prime Vendor, to include all
necessary interfaces and be responsible for the provision of the functionality requested by
Avista in this RFP. Avista requires a Prime Vendor approach for these Partnered Solutions to manage, coordinate implementation and be responsible for all subcontractors and third-party
software related to their proposed Partnered Solution.
• Implement Improved Business Processes
Avista expects the Solution Provider(s) to provide leadership during product configuration to
implement common / best practices in order to meet the application’s functionality. Avista will rely upon product configuration rather than product modifications and will consider
modifying its business processes to fit the technology workflow.
MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
Avista expects the Proposed Solution(s) meet the following minimum requirements and that
each of these requirements be included in and clearly addressed as part of the Proposal. In
reviewing these minimum requirements, Solution Provider(s) should consider each item’s relevance to the specific solution or service being proposed.
Proposed software minimum requirements:

Attachment 8
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 2 of 3
1. The Proposed Solution is successfully in operation at a minimum of 10 utilities in North
America, three of which serve a minimum of 500,000 gas and electric customers.
2. The Proposed Solution is currently in production on a similar platform as that being proposed for Avista.
3. The Proposed Solution has been proven to scale to over one million customer accounts.
4. The Proposed Solution will promote implementation of a functionally rich base product with minimal modifications. Avista will not accept custom development Proposals
5. The Proposed Solution must accommodate a multi-company or multi-state environment with varying tariffs, rules and regulations (at least three states and three utility commissions).
or
those that rely on extensive levels of customization. In addition, Solution Provider must be capable of providing ongoing maintenance support and scheduled product releases as demonstrated through a well-defined, robust product road map.
6. The Proposed Solution must include licensed packaged products capable of being run either within an in-house data center or in a hosted data center on Avista’s behalf. Avista will not consider a Software as a Service (SaaS) solution at this time.
Solution Integrator minimum requirements:
7. The SI must be a well-established professional organization that offers the
implementation / integration of hardware, software and services for Proposed Solution.
The SI must have been in business for a minimum of three years. The SI shall place only experienced professionals on the Proposed Solution. The project manager, technical lead,
and functional lead must have a minimum of three referenceable implementations and at
least five years experience of the Proposed Solution. Other level professionals must have a minimum of two years of experience with the Proposed Solution.
8. The SI must be a financially healthy institution capable of conducting business during the
entire Proposed Solution implementation period and the associated post go-live support period as measured by financial statements, D&B report, etc. SI shall attach three years
of audited financial records, D&B reports, etc., and any interim statements.
9. The SI must not be involved in any litigation that may potentially impact the SI's ability to support Proposed Solution and any required support. The SI must disclose any and all
existing and pending litigation in the RFP response.

Questions regarding this procurement and RFP are due by end of business Pacific time, Thursday, September 22, 2011.
The will be a pre-proposal phone conference on Tuesday, September 27.
Proposals are due by 3:00 p.m. Pacific time, Friday, October 21 2011.
If you would like to receive this RFP, you will be required to complete, sign and return Avista’s
Non-Disclosure Agreement and Five Point Partner’s Terms of Use Agreement, and register the
individuals who will access STAR. STAR is the acronym for Five Point Partner’s “Selection Tool for Assessment and Requirements.” This online tool replaces functions and features
checklists of software product functionality. This tool will be used by the Solution Provider(s) to
access Avista’s requirements for the new Enterprise Solution. Those documents must be fully executed and sent to Gary Weseloh at [e-mail] before the RFP documents
will be released.
Attachment 8
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 3 of 3
Avista RFP Distribution List (September 12, 2011)
CIS VendorsCC&B (Oracle) Adam Stafford : [e-mail] and Michael Fryke [e-mail] and Joe Caprice [e-mail] and David Bickerstaff david.bickerstaff@oracle..com 903-340-9502 CRB - SAP (Roger Egle) [e-mail] 541-221-8142 Vertex - Dan Sullivan [e-mail] 214-576-1000

EAM VendorsMaximo (IBM) – Bill Boone : [e-mail] and Chris Norton [e-mail] and Patrick Baxter [e-mail] and Jeff Burch (sycomp) [e-mail] 650-312-8174 WAM (Oracle) - Adam Stafford [e-mail] and Michael Fryke [e-mail] eBusiness Suite (Oracle) - Adam Stafford [e-mail] and Michael Fryke [e-mail] SAP - Roger Egle [e-mail] 541-221-8142 Logica - Shannon Nafaa [e-mail] 713-954-7003 and Kurt Ergene [e-mail] 760-591-4810 Invensys – Plano Headquarters office - 469 365 6400Cascade –Neil (they are not interested in this RFP) [e-mail] 888.222.8399 Infor – Alpharetta GA Headquarters office – 800-260-2640 (no answer – I’ll keep trying) Passport (Ventyx) - Leo Hagood [e-mail] 404-630-4846 Tabware - Hope Brooks-Moore [e-mail] 864-679-3415 ISM (Sage SalesLogix) - Scott Smallbeck CRM Vendors: [e-mail] 503-496-5374

Solution IntegratorsEp2M - John Schulte : [e-mail] 402-968-6634 HCL - Mark Graham [e-mail] 925-381-7742 and John Lugviel [e-mail] 509-443-0158 and Andrew Jornod [e-mail] 214-578-7969 Waggware - Paul Buster [e-mail] 281-436-7280 x 240 Accenture - Ron Aberman [e-mail] 355-401-0304 and Trey Thornton [e-mail] 818-795-6608 IBM – Tony Johnson [e-mail] 205-482-7311 and Jacob Miller [e-mail] 206-587-6775 PwC – Steve Obosnenko [e-mail] 610-357-7550 and James Mergenthaler [e-mail] 312-298-5826 Deloitte – Tom Turco [e-mail] 678-521-7972 and Ian Wright [e-mail] 215-430-6217 and Jason Stevens [e-mail] and Gabriel Tovar [e-mail]
Attachment 9
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 1 of 2
Sparta – Shelaindra Bhardwaj [e-mail] 888-985-0301 x 246 and Chandra Joshi [e-mail] Gemini – Ian Roy 888-651-2952 x 147 [e-mail] 972-793-4400 Infosys – David Shin [e-mail] 954-452-7311 Wipro – Walt Little [e-mail] 941-735-6293 ProMark Solutions – Gabrielle Porath [e-mail] 702-622-7863
Attachment 9
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 2 of 2

GUIDEBOOK

Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 1 of 51

Project Compass Guidebook

2012

Client Manager: Michael Mudge
Revisions:
Version Date By Approved
Version 1 1/27/2012 Peggy Blowers, Jody
Morehouse, and
Michael Mudge

Preliminary Draft Confidential
Please note that the information contained herein is preliminary and for discussion purposes only. It does not necessarily
represent the views of Company management (and may, in some cases, represent only the views of independent consultants or
advisors). Accordingly, any preliminary estimates, costs or benefits, as well as the characterizations of such, are subject to
change and will be revised as, and to the extent, the project proceeds.

Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 2 of 51
Table of Contents
Procurement Phase ....................................................................................................................................... 5
Procurement: Objective ............................................................................................................................ 5
Procurement: Scope ................................................................................................................................. 6
Procurement: Roles and Responsibilities ................................................................................................. 7
Procurement: Timeline ........................................................................................................................... 11
Procurement: Organization and Staffing ................................................................................................ 11
Procurement: Schedule .......................................................................................................................... 15
Procurement: Resources ......................................................................................................................... 16
Procurement: Budget .............................................................................................................................. 17
Procurement: Change Management / Communication ......................................................................... 17
Current State Mapping ............................................................................................................................... 19
Current State: Objective ......................................................................................................................... 19
Current State: Scope ............................................................................................................................... 19
Current State: Process Overview ............................................................................................................ 20
Current State: Business Process Inventory ............................................................................................. 20
Current State: Roles and Expectations ................................................................................................... 20
Current State: Change Management / Communication ......................................................................... 21
Current State: Training ............................................................................................................................ 21
Current State: Schedule .......................................................................................................................... 22
Current State: Resources ........................................................................................................................ 22
Current State: Budget ............................................................................................................................. 22
Summary ..................................................................................................................................................... 23
Appendix ..................................................................................................................................................... 23

Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 3 of 51

Procurement Phase

Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 4 of 51
Procurement Phase

This section of the guidebook is specific to the Procurement Phase of Project Compass.

Procurement: Objective

Avista’s homegrown, customized customer information system (CIS) has served our company
and our customers well for over 20 years. Integrating commercial, off-the-shelf software and
other internally developed systems into the CIS over time has fortified the technology
foundation that helped Avista receive national awards and consistently high customer-service
ratings. But at the end of the day, Avista’s CIS has design limitations to accommodate future
products, programs and services; is supported by an aging workforce, and any enhancements
increase the complexity of the system. Taking Avista into an energy future with technology as
its foundation requires a flexible CIS platform that can provide the choices that matter most to
our customers.
When Avista’s CIS platform was developed 20 years ago, there were no smart phones or iPads.
Home computers were uncommon and customers did not expect to be involved in energy
choices. While our current CIS provides good functionality and is user friendly, it is important
that Avista’s technology continues to evolve, and is able to deliver the type of service options
that we believe customers will seek.
Avista’s investments in developing a smarter grid will enable a different, more interactive
relationship with our customers. To achieve these objectives, Avista’s CIS may include the ability
to accommodate not only Smart Grid technology, but also may incorporate:
• Automated meter information
• Energy efficiency programs
• Real-time billing
• On-bill financing
• Automated notifications based on customer preferences
• Customer relationship management capabilities
• Multi-channel, self-service options.

In addition, the new CIS needs the flexibility to accommodate regulatory changes.
Refurbishing or replacing Avista’s CIS is a significant decision that will impact all aspects of the
company’s operations. Linking into the CIS are many current company systems. These include
Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 5 of 51

Procurement: Objectives Continued
outsourced bill presentment, outage management, work and asset management, automated
phone system, construction design, enterprise business intelligence, supply chain and financial
systems. Also linking into CIS are electric and gas meter applications, and the avistautilties.com
website for managing customer self-service transactions.
Replacing the customized CIS with an off-the-shelf application means a commitment to adjust
Avista’s business processes and procedures to align with the software. Managing the change
process will be a key element of the project plan. Avista is committed to moving forward with
replacing its legacy customer service system with an off-the-shelf application. This will provide
the company with industry standard software and a solution that will keep pace with Avista’s
evolving energy business. It will also eliminate the challenges of maintaining a customized
system.

Procurement: Scope
CSS – (Customer Service System)
CSS is Avista’s home grown customer information system was implemented in August 1994 and
supports all of the traditional utility business functions such as meter reading, billing, payment
processing, credit, collections, field requests and service work orders.
The Customer Service System (CSS) is an internally-developed system that was implemented in
1994 following a three-year development effort – it replaced a prior internally-developed CIS
system that ran on the mainframe platform. The new system was developed utilizing then
newer technology (relation databases, CASE tool, SmallTalk, etc.). An enterprise-wide
information modeling project preceded this project, so the system was developed utilizing
concepts such as single-source data, subject-area databases, etc. – it was very data-driven.
The system handles all aspects of customer / customer account processing including billing,
collections, payments and deposits, metering and usage.
• CSS is currently supported by Avista’s in-house HP Workplace Support Team.
• CSS is the single source for customer-related data which is widely used throughout
Avista. Much of the data is exported to an Oracle database (WRKPRD) where it is
available for ad hoc reporting. A Customer DataMart also resides in WRKPRD, providing
enhanced reporting capabilities through Cognos.
• The batch billing processing window is typically from 8:10pm to 1:00am Monday –
Friday.
Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 6 of 51
Procurement: Scope Continued
WMS – (Work Management System)

WMS is Avista’s home grown work management system that is tightly integrated with CSS.
WMS is used to create constructions jobs. The materials are ordered though WMS which is
interfaced with Oracle ERP. The integration is one way; the service technicians can order
through WMS but are unable to track the order. Avista staff can also assign jobs to a crew but
this too happens through use of another program which is being revised as part of Avista’s
Performance Excellence program. Avista also orders locates and right away permits using WMS.
Avista has been unsuccessful to do the same in Construction Design Application (CDA) because
the various Municipalities we serve are unwilling to standardize and use email as a form of
communication for permits.

EGMA – (Electric and Gas Meter Application)

EGMA supports electric and gas meter inventory, meter tracking and meter testing. EGMA is
tightly integrated with CSS.

Mobile, METS, and Gas Compliance Applications

The replacement of our CIS/WMS (WorkPlace) system will greatly impact our Mobile, METS, and
Gas Compliance systems. As these systems are heavily integrated with the Workplace, and as
the new CIS/WMS will likely cause many information and process changes; these systems will
need to be closely reviewed for scope, change, and integration.
(See Appendix A to view Avista’s Current Business System Model.)

Procurement: Roles and Responsibilities

Executive Steering Committee
• Commit to being an advocate and champion of the CIS project.

• Approves initial and changes to project scope, budget and timeline.
• Attend and actively participates in Steering Committee meetings, critiquing the ability to
perform on scope, budget and timeline.

Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 7 of 51
Procurement: Roles and Responsibilities Continued
• Critique project scope, budget and timeline based on long-term vision and corporate
compliance.
• Question to understand high level decisions brought to the Steering Committee for resolution.
Support decisions or reject with options or opportunities to resolve.
• Support the communication needed regarding change as a result of the project, both formally
and informally, sharing both consequences and impacts to company and project.
• Commit to Change Management as a means of positive impact to all areas of company
operations.
• Approves all invoices, CPRs, and charges over $99,999. Approve all additions to compliment.
• Approve and support resources from all key areas of the company. Intervene as requested to
assure attendance and commitment.
• Allow project sponsors first line of opportunity to manage and communicate with solution
providers, employees and interveners.

Executive Officer Sponsor
• Defines the strategic goals, liaison between steering committee, the remaining Executive Team
and the Board of Directors

• Ensure corporate-wide acknowledgement, participation and buy-in
• Provide input and advice on Avista operations from a corporate and management-level as they
affect the project
• Resolves inter-departmental issues that cannot be resolved at a project sponsor level
• Attends and actively participates in Steering Committee meetings

Executive Project Sponsors
• Provide oversight, leadership and vision for the CSS/WMS replacement project

• Responsible for the direction and planning of the CIS/WMS selection, including facilitating
resource needs, resolving issues and executive communication
• Create and communicate CSS/WMS replacement project high-level vision
• Manage upward communication to the Steering Committee and other business leadership
groups
• Review progress and resolve issues elevated by the project
• Oversee management of CSS/WMS risks and issues
• Act as escalation point for significant vendor issues; maintain working relationship with vendor
executives
• Review and act upon budget changes and/or additions
• Ensure project objectives and goals support and link with the general business goals and mission
• Approve major project decisions
• Provide oversight and mentor the team
• Responsible for project outcome
• Responsible for approving, prioritizing, or deferring significant issues
• Attends and actively participates in Steering Committee meetings

Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 8 of 51
Procurement: Roles and Responsibilities Continued
• Key Stakeholders for the CSS/WMS project as a whole
Compass Directors Panel
• Responsible for assuring the new systems will meet their department and division needs
• Assume responsibility for their areas participation and ultimate project success
• First-line resource in issue escalation from the project sponsors
• Be in direct communication with the project team members that report to them
• Attend CSS activities as requested
• Create CSS/WMS vision for their area
• Work with project team resources to ensure they have the line of business vision for CSS/WMS
in mind during the project process
• Escalate and communicate issues with both the core project team resources and their
management for resolution
• Work with Avista Project Manager and Five Point Project Manager on requested deliverables
and/or project activities
• Attend and participate in Director Team meetings

• The Five Point Project Manager provides direction on the CSS/WMS Replacement Project
(Project Compass) methodology
Five Point Partners
• Provide industry expertise and guidance in working with the CIS/CRM and EAM/WAM vendors
and SI’s
• Accountable to the Project Manager and Executive Sponsors for regular updates on progress
and status
• Provide proposed Project Compass schedule, including critical path milestones and
dependencies with other projects
• Continuously forecast and anticipate changes in scope, resources, timelines, budget, etc.
• Participate in Executive Steering Committee meetings

• Provide Project Management and leadership to the Avista Project Compass Team
Avista Client Manager
• Accountable to Project Sponsors for providing information for regular progress & status updates
• Create a collaborative relationship between all departments
• Update and manage project schedule, including the Avista team activities, critical path
milestones and dependencies with other projects
• Identify, track, resolve and/or escalate project issues
• Manage the change control process for any”’ changes to project scope, timeline or budget
• Manage key Stakeholder expectations for the project
• Provide invoice validation for all vendor payments
• Work with Project Sponsors and other management to secure required Project Team members
• Ensure work products meet quality standards
• Identify, oversee and resolve issues and risks related to cross-project dependencies

Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 9 of 51
Procurement: Roles and Responsibilities Continued

• Primary contact between Avista, CSS/WMS vendor(s), Quality Assurance consultant, and System
Integration (SI)
• Collaborate with SI to develop and maintain detailed and accurate comprehensive project plan
• Provide a weekly project status report to the Project Sponsors
• Participate in project status meetings
• Facilitate regular meetings with the Directors Team

• Provide information on an as-needed basis
Project Compass Procurement Team / Subject Matter Experts (SMEs)
• Provide expertise in their particular subject to inform the CSS/WMS selection process
• Provide input on the recommendations for the project
• Provide requested information to Avista Project Manager and/or Five Point Project Manager
• Attend project meetings and activities as requested by Avista Project Manager and/or Five Point
Project Manager
• Provide guidance on the CSS/WMS business requirements, gaps and issues
• Identify issues and risks for area of responsibility or outside that area if necessary
• Update the Avista Project Manager on any issues
• Serve as key SME to project meetings, RFP and system reviews
• Represent your department needs and keep your department and management informed
• Look for opportunities to optimize processes and procedures by leveraging the new system
features and functionality
• Be willing and open to change, agree to disagree and support decisions made with a positive
attitude
• Meet project deliverables and timeline on assigned tasks and issues
• Provide expertise regarding functionality, business processes and technology

Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 10 of 51
Procurement: Timeline

Procurement: Organization and Staffing

Executive Steering Committee
Don Kopczynski (chair) Jim Kensok
Jason Thackston Dennis Vermillion
Roger Woodworth Dick Storro
Executive Sponsors
Pat Dever Vicki Weber
Procurement Consultants – Five Point
Gary Weseloh Greg Galluzzi
Craig Mills Brent Dreher
Avista Client Manager
Michael Mudge
Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 11 of 51
Procurement: Organization and Staffing Continued

Project Compass Staff
Pat Dever Vicki Weber
Mike Mudge Janna Leaf
DJ Kinservik Renee Webb
Peggy Blowers Jody Morehouse
Project Compass Procurement Team
Vicki Weber Pat Dever
Mike Mudge Janna Leaf
DJ Kinservik Renee Webb
Peggy Blowers Jody Morehouse
Lauren Turner Gary Weseloh
Bob Weisbeck Lamont Miles
Tami Judge Rodney Picket
Amber Gifford Mollie Weis
Catherine Mueller Bill Ramshaw
Frank Johnson Jackie Foss
Judy Olson Karen Doran
Kevin Farrington Mark Michaelis
Mike Littrel Rachelle Humphrey
Ron Simmons Laurie Heagle
CIS Evaluation Team
Vicki Weber Pat Dever
Jody Morehouse Teresa Damon
Mike Mudge Lamont Miles
DJ Kinservik Greg Paulson
Janna Leaf Jackie Foss
Renee Webb Ken Humphries
Gary Weseloh Tami Judge
Peggy Blowers Karen Doran
Maureen Olson Kelly Conley
Robert Dodd Rachelle Humphrey
Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 12 of 51
Procurement: Organization and Staffing Continued

Mobile Workforce Evaluation Team
Vicki Weber Pat Dever
Jody Morehouse Jackie Foss
Mike Mudge Mike Littrel
DJ Kinservik Frank Johnson
Janna Leaf Ron Simmons
Renee Webb Robert Dodd
Gary Weseloh Kevin Farrington
Technology Evaluation Team
Vicki Weber Pat Dever
Peggy Blowers Tom Heavey
Mike Mudge Cam Mallon
DJ Kinservik Bill Ramshaw
Janna Leaf Mollie Weis
Renee Webb Maureen Olson
Gary Weseloh Robert Dodd
Jody Morehouse Kevin Farrington
Ron Simmons Mark Michaelis
WMS Asset Evaluation Team
Vicki Weber Pat Dever
Mike Mudge Bob Weisbeck
Jody Morehouse Lamont Miles
DJ Kinservik Teresa Damon
Janna Leaf Catherine Mueller
Peggy Blowers Rodney Pickett
Final Evaluation Team
Peggy Blowers Rodney Pickett
DJ Kinservik Tom Heavey
Janna Leaf Jody Morehouse
Renee Webb Tami Judge
Gary Weseloh Lamont Miles
Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 13 of 51
Procurement: Organization and Staffing Continued

Contract Negotiation Team
Greg Galluzzi Gary Weseloh
Pat Dever Vicki Weber
Stacey Levin Patty Wood
Louisa Barash
Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 14 of 51
Procurement: Schedule
Project Compass Procurement Calendar
Service Order Mgmt WebEx IBM/Maximo Prod. Demonstration IBM/Maximo Prod. Demonstration Ventyx 9.1 Demo
CR 130 Auditorium Auditorium Auditorium
1:30pm - 3:00pm 8:00am - 5:00pm 8:30am - 4:30pm 9:00am - 4:00pmCIS Evaluation Team/Open WMS Asset Evaluation Team/Open WMS Asset Evaluation/Open MWM Evaluation Team/Open
Follow-Up evaluation of SAP
Service Order Mgmt
capabilities Refer to Demo Calendar Refer to Demo Calendar Refer to Demo Calendar
IBM Technology Breakout Session
CR 130
9:00am - 5:00pmTechnology Evaluation Team
Technology Evaluation of Maximo
CIS Evaluation WMS/Asset Evaluation Final Recommendation Workshop Working Session Steering Committee Roundtable
Mirabeau CR 701 Mirabeau CR 701 Mirabeau CR 701 Mirabeau CR 702
8:00am - 2:00pm 8:00am - 12:00pm 8:00am - 2:00pm 8:00am - 5:00pm
CIS Evaluation Team WMS Asset Evaluation Team Final Evaluation Team Pat, Vicki, Gary, others as needed
Opening Statement / Round
Table / Score Gathering /
Concluding Discussion
Opening Statement / Round Table /
Score Gathering / Concluding
Discussion
Review the data and conclusions of
each of the previous eval. sessions,
drive to Final Recommendation
Prepare Final Recommendation for
Steering Committee
Technology Evaluation Mobile Workforce EvaluationMirabeau CR 701 Mirabeau CR 701
2:30pm - 4:30pm 1:00pm - 5:00pm
Technology Evaluation Team Mobile Workforce Eval. Team
Opening Statement / Round
Table / Score Gathering /
Concluding Discussion
Opening Statement / Round Table /
Score Gathering / Concluding
Discussion
Steering Committee Notification to the Selected SI
Executive Sponsers Procurement Partners
Deliver Final Recommendation Deliver selection to SI
Detailed Prod Review Cont. CIS Detailed Prod Review MWM Overflow
Auditorium Auditorium Auditorium Auditorium Auditorium
8:00am - 5:00pm 8:00am - 5:00pm 8:00am - 5:00pm 8:00am - 5:00pm 8:00am - 5:00pm
CIS Evaluation Team/SME's MWM Evaluation Team/SME's WMS/Asset Evaluation Team/SME's WMS/Asset Evaluation Team/SME's Pull in as needed
Ensure Prod. Meets Reqmts. Ensure Prod. Meets Reqmts. Ensure Prod. Meets Reqmts. Ensure Prod. Meets Reqmts. Ensure Prod. Meets Reqmts.
Contracts Approved
Project Staff/SME's
Avista - Additional Reference Checks and Possible Site Visits
Avista - Additional Reference Checks and Possible Site Visits
Project Staff/SME's
Auitorium
8:00am - 5:00pm every day
Ensure Product meets requirements
CIS Evaluation Team/SME's
Detailed Prod Review EAM
Procurement Partners - Five Point Red Lines Vendor and Standart Contracts and Assists SI with SOWProject Staff Compiles additional information needed to start project
Procurement Partners - Five Point reviews first draft of SOWContract Negotiation Team red-lines contracts and returns first iteration back to the SI and Vendors
Procurement Partners - Five Point and Project Staff review SI's SOW and develops the overall project plan, resource plan, project budget
Contract Negotiation Team reviews BAFO
Contract Negotiation Team prepares for on site contract and SOW negotiations
Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 15 of 51
Procurement: Resources

Procurement Resource Usage Matrix

23
-
J
a
n
24
-
J
a
n
25
-
J
a
n
26
-
J
a
n
27
-
J
a
n
30
-
J
a
n
31
-
J
a
n
1-
F
e
b
2-
F
e
b
3-
F
e
b
6-
F
e
b
7-
F
e
b
8-
F
e
b
9-
F
e
b
10
-
F
e
b
13
-
F
e
b
14
-
F
e
b
15
-
F
e
b
16
-
F
e
b
17
-
F
e
b
20
-
F
e
b
21
-
F
e
b
22
-
F
e
b
23
-
F
e
b
24
-
F
e
b
27
-
F
e
b
28
-
F
e
b
29
-
F
e
b
1-
M
a
r
2-
M
a
r
5-
M
a
r
6-
M
a
r
7-
M
a
r
8-
M
a
r
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x
x x x
x x x x x x
x x x
x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
x x x
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
x x x
x x x x x x x x x x
x x x
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x
x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x
Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 16 of 51
Procurement: Budget

Procurement: Change Management / Communication

Project Compass will involve changing business processes, systems, and roles. Organizational
Change Management (OCM) supports individual employees impacted by the change through
their own transitions - from their own current state to their own future state that has been
created by the implementation of the new business systems. It provides a structured and
intentional approach to enable individual employees to adopt the changes required by
implementing these new systems.
Specific Procurement Phase OCM goals include:
• Building organizational awareness
• Building relationships and trust
• Setting expectations
• Identifying and opening communication channels

(See Appendix B to view the Change Management Plan Overview.)
(See Appendix C to view the OCM Procurement Phase Deliverables.)

Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 17 of 51

Current State Mapping

Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 18 of 51
Current State Mapping

This section of the guidebook is specific to the Current State Mapping Phase of Project Compass.

Current State: Objective

The objective of capturing current state information for business processes is to reduce overall
risk to Project Compass. By focusing on each business area affected by the change of the Work
Management System (WMS), Customer Information (CSS) System, and Electric Gas Meter
Application (EGMA), Mobile Workforce, Compliance List Manager, and METS, the probability of
missing critical information in the blue print phase is significantly reduced. Missed processes or
critical information within processes can result in delays and rework, impacting both the
timeline and the budget of the overall project.
Additionally, the members of the teams will gain an understanding of the impact and scope of
the project as they participate in mapping out their processes. This will facilitate work groups
through the changes that will occur to the business as a result of Project Compass by fostering
support and building familiarity. The efforts in current state mapping will jump start the future
state blue print mapping phase as the data will be used in creating training documents, test
scripts, and templates for the next phases in the project.

Current State: Scope

The scope includes capturing key attributes on current business processes across the lines of
business. Teams comprised of Subject Matter Experts from the lines of business will focus on
the essential process attributes and key data that will facilitate and accelerate the future state
mapping exercises. There are currently 29 business areas and business process owners
recognized that have catalogued 297 business processes to be mapped that involve direct use of
WMS or CSS either now or in a future state.
The effort to capture current states began in the summer of 2011 with the Contact Center
processes. The effort to capture the current states for the other 26 business areas will begin in
earnest in February of 2012 and continue for 18 weeks completing in June. Each process
mapping session is estimated to take 2 – 4 hours each and each team is estimated to have 6 – 8
Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 19 of 51
Current State: Scope Continued
participants including a Facilitator, Recorder, Scribe, and 3 – 5 Subject Matter Experts (SME).
The Project Team assembled Facilitators and Recorders to aid each business area with their
mapping exercises.
(See Appendix D to view the Current State Master Inventory List.)
Current State: Process Overview

The methodology for capturing the current state maps includes identifying the affected lines of
business, listing business process inventories for each business line, determining the supporting
roles, identifying the resources necessary for each of the exercises, training the people who will
be participating, and scheduling out the sessions to be completed by end of June 2012.
Some of the key attributes of the processes to be captured in the current state mapping
exercises include the inputs, outputs, interfaces, mandates, source documents, roles, metrics,
broken or inefficient processes, “wish list” functionality, and reports. The attached Visio
template illustrates this information.
(See Appendix E to view the Current State Visio Template.)
Current State: Business Process Inventory

The business process owners cataloged 297 processes across 29 business areas. Attached are
the inventory lists by business process area. As the current states for the processes are
completed, these lists will be updated to track the progress for each business area. This
information will then be reported out to the key stakeholders at regular intervals.
(See Appendix F to view sample process inventory list.)
Current State: Roles and Expectations

The roles for the mapping exercises include:
• Business Process Owner
• Facilitator
• Scribe
• Recorder
• Subject Matter Expert (SME)
Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 20 of 51
Current State: Roles and Expectations Continued
(See Appendix G to view the current state guidelines and role document.)
(See Appendix H to view the current state ground rules document.)

Current State: Change Management / Communication

A Business Process Improvement update focused on the current state mapping process was
provided to Directors, Managers, Process Owners, Facilitators, Recorders, and Subject Matter
Experts November 2011 through February 2012. (See Procurement Change Management above
for overall Change Management/Communication deliverables.)
(See Appendix I to view the BPI Current State Presentation.)
Current State: Training

All Facilitators, Recorders and SME’s will be provided training prior to independently completing
their assigned process mapping sessions. All training material will be posted on the Project
Compass Share Point site as reference material.
Current State Training Matrix
Audience Training Vehicle Information
Directors/
Managers
Meeting/email • Process Guidelines, Roles,
Expectations, Resource
requirements, Schedule
Business Process Owners Classroom/meeting/email • Process Guidelines, Roles,
Expectations
Facilitators Classroom/meeting • Process Guidelines, Roles,
Expectations
• Share Point overview
• Observe experienced Facilitator
Feedback • Experienced facilitator observes
and provides feedback
Recorders/Scribes Classroom/meeting • Process Guidelines, Roles,
Expectations
• Share Point overview
• Visio
Subject Matter Experts
(SME’s)
Classroom/meeting • Process Guidelines, Roles,
Expectations
• Share Point overview
Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 21 of 51
Current State: Schedule

The Project Compass Current State calendar will be published on a weekly basis to the public
Project Compass SharePoint Site. Please note that the main schedule will be kept in the Project
Compass Current State Calendar in Outlook. If there is a discrepancy between the two, then the
Outlook Calendar is considered the source document.
(See Appendix J for the full Current State Mapping Schedule.)
(See Appendix K for the Current State Mapping Gantt Schedule.)

Current State: Resources

(See Appendix L for Current State Mapping Resources by Business Area)

Current State: Budget

Project Task Org 201202 201203 201204 201205 201206 Total
ExpenseCSSProject Compass Current State Labor 09905569 920000 40,885 80,066 78,362 54,512 17,035 $270,860
Labor Expenses Total $49,633 $97,198 $97,198 $66,178 $20,681 $330,888
Non-Labor CSS N52 - CSS Replacement Project - Supplies 09905569 921000 100 100 100 100 100 $500
CSS N52 - CSS Software Purchase 09905569 921000 1,000 ----$1,000
Non-Labor Expenses Total $1,100 $100 $100 $100 $100 $1,500
$50,733 $97,298 $97,298 $66,278 $20,781 $332,388
Budget $50,733 $97,298 $97,298 $66,278 $20,781 $332,388
Variance $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
PRELIMINARY DRAFT/CONFIDENTIAL
Total Expenses
2012 Project Compass Current State
OPER Expenses by Labor/Non-Labor
Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 22 of 51
Summary

Avista’s future includes the successful implementation of an enterprise business solution which
replaces our homegrown, customized systems. The ability to view one customer, many
locations, and one format simplifies our work, reduces costs, and will enhance our internal and
external customer experience. This Project Compass Guidebook provides the detailed approach
to successfully implementing the new solution.

Appendix
APPENDIX A: Avista’s Current Business System Model
Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 23 of 51
APPENDIX B: Change Management Plan Overview

APPENDIX C: OCM Procurement Phase Deliverables
Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 24 of 51
APPENDIX D: Current State Master Inventory List
Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 25 of 51
APPENDIX E: Current State Visio Template
Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 26 of 51
APPENDIX F: Sample Process Inventory Lists
C

Bu
s
i
n
e
s
s

A
r
e
a

P
r
o
c
e
s
s

O
w
n
e
r
:

M
a
r
k

B
a
k
e
r
La
s
t

U
p
d
a
t
e
:

1
2
-
0
2
-
2
0
1
1
Ca
t
e
g
Pr
o
c
e
s
s
De
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n

In
t
e
r
f
a
c
e
s
Pr
o
c
e
s
s

O
w
n
e
r
P

Lo
w
)
Cu
r

St
a
t

C

Da
t
e
SM
E

P
a
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
n
t
s
C

C

M
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l

r
e
b
a
t
e

r
e
p
R

C

s

f

D

o

e

M

v

CS
S

Ma
r
k

B
a
k
e
r
Hig
h
On
g
o
i
n
g
Ma
r
k

B
a
k
e
r
C

C

M
Lo
w

I
n
c
o
m
e

r
e
b
a
t
e

r
e
p
L

C

s

f

D

o

e

M

v

CS
S

Ma
r
k

B
a
k
e
r
Hig
h
On
g
o
i
n
g
Ma
r
k

B
a
k
e
r
C

C

M
N

(

g

N

i

a

t

i

m

i

p

o

n
Sa
l
e
s
L
o
g
i
x
Ma
r
k

B
a
k
e
r
Hig
h
On
g
o
i
n
g
Ma
r
k

B
a
k
e
r
,

G
r
e
t
a

Z
i
n
k
,

L
o
r
r
i

K
i
r
s
t
e
i
n
C

C

M
Ad

h
o
c

a
n
d

s
p
e
c
i
a
l

r
e
p
A

r

i

m

i

p

t

s
CS
S

o
r

S
a
l
e
s
L
o
g
i
x
Ma
r
k

B
a
k
e
r
Hig
h
On
g
o
i
n
g
Ma
r
k

B
a
k
e
r
,

G
r
e
t
a

Z
i
n
k
,

L
o
r
r
i

K
i
r
s
t
e
i
n
C

C

M
N

(

g

c

N

w

p

i

m

a

o

p

o

n
Sa
l
e
s
L
o
g
i
x
Ma
r
k

B
a
k
e
r
Hig
h
On
g
o
i
n
g
Ma
r
k

B
a
k
e
r
,

G
r
e
t
a

Z
i
n
k
,

L
o
r
r
i

K
i
r
s
t
e
i
n
,

A
E
Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 27 of 51
APPENDIX G: Current State Guidelines and Roles Document
Current State Mapping Guidelines and Roles
Revised: February 6, 2012
For each unique business process, a Current State needs to be captured through a Current State
mapping exercise. These are the guidelines and role definitions for the Business Process Owners,
Facilitators, Scribes, Recorders, and Subject Matter Experts.
Mapping Exercise Overview and Roles
In each mapping session, there will be these roles:
• Business Process Owner
•
: (BPO) Owns processes, makes key decisions, gives final approvals and
sign-offs on Current State maps.
Facilitator
•
: Leads the sessions, watches time, facilitates closure on issues.
Scribe
•
: Captures information on white board.
Recorder
•
: Captures information in Visio.
Subject Matter Experts

: (SMEs) Provide expertise in their particular subject.
Teams may also benefit from having someone able to project information onto a screen to facilitate the
discussion. In some instances, the Facilitator, the Scribe, and/or the Business Process Owner may be the
same person.
The Current State process will be mapped in Visio, but should first be captured on a white board to start.
The Visio template is located at:
http://sharepoint/projects/CSS/team/Business%20Process%20Current%20State/BP%20Guidelines%20a
nd%20Master%20Documents/Template%20Current%20State%20110111.vsd
Version Control:
The BPO will be responsible to approve and sign off on the final Visio Current State maps. The status of
the document should be indicated as “In Progress” on SharePoint until the final sign off, and then
marked “Final” by Lauren Turner. If a change needs to occur after this, the document should be checked
out, modified, forwarded to the BPO for approval, and then rechecked in with comments. When making
significant changes to a Visio document, please work through Lauren Turner and she will assist with
revising the version of the document.
List of Items Needed:
1. Ground Rules Poster
2. Multiple white boards with 5 swim lanes drawn on them
3. Various colored white board markers – one distinct color for each lane
4. Current State templates (a blank one and a pre-filled one with requirements)
Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 28 of 51
5. Projector
6. Visio on a laptop
Business Process Owner
The Business Process Owner
1. Prior to scheduling the Current State exercises, create an inventory of business processes that
are integrated with the systems associated with Project Compass. These will then need to be
prioritized as high, medium, or low and the SMEs will need to be identified. Please use the
80/20 rule for prioritizing. This list should be emailed to Lauren Turner each time it is modified
so she can track the changes. She will post these on SharePoint and use them for tracking our
progress.
will have these responsibilities:
a. High = Critical and/or process done on a continuous basis
b. Medium = Important and/or frequent process
c. Low = Rarely done, not critical to business
2. Approve final Current State maps in a timely manner.
3. Mediate and make final decisions on process steps that are in dispute or to pick a “best
practice”.
Scribe
The Scribe
1. Capture these elements on the board:
will have these responsibilities:
a. Business process name
b. Start and stop times
2. Capture the process on the white board in the same format as it looks on the Visio template. It
is faster and easier to do this exercise on the whiteboard rather than in Visio. Use a different
color dry erase pen for each lane for clarity.
3. Ask any clarifying questions that might be helpful.
Recorder
The Recorder
1. Capture these elements into the Visio diagram:
will have these responsibilities:
a. Business process name
b. Date
c. SMEs
d. Facilitator, Scribe, Recorder
e. Business Process Owner
f. Start and stop times
g. Version (typically version 1)
2. Transfer the Current State process from the white board into a Visio diagram.
3. Name the Visio Current State map with the process name and do a “save as” for the map.
4. Ask any clarifying questions that might be helpful during the Current State session.
Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 29 of 51
5. Send the Visio diagram to the Facilitator when complete.
Subject Matter Experts (SMEs)
The SMEs

will have these responsibilities:
1. Provide expertise about the process pertaining to their particular roles during the Current State
mapping session.
2. Provide input on recommendations for the process.
3. Be respectful of others and to follow the Ground Rules.
4. Be willing and open to change, agree to disagree, and support decisions made with a positive
attitude.
5. Use time wisely and efficiently by working quickly to conclusions.
6. Defer impasses to the Facilitator who may move the issue to the BPO for input and a decision.

Facilitator
The Facilitator
1. Organize and schedule the mapping sessions through the designated Compass Current State
Outlook Calendar. Use the Mirabeau conference rooms as much as possible for the sessions. Be
sure to include the SMEs identified, and the Business Process Owner. The Scribe and Recorder
will be pre-assigned to your session.
will have the job of guiding the group through the Current State mapping process, and
will have these responsibilities:
2. Assign someone to use projector to demonstrate certain steps in the system if needed.
3. Review the Ground Rules (post them on the wall).
4. Strive to keep each session to 2-4 hours in length. Please be aware of the resource
commitment in each session and drive to get these sessions completed as quickly and
efficiently as possible.
5. Keep the discussion moving and help the team to land on a best practice if more than one
process is practiced.
6. Defer issues that are at an impasse to the Business Process Owner for resolution.
7. Ask if there are any special situations that don’t fit into the normal process.
8. Capture the key attributes (in the “swim lanes”) that the Facilitator should concentrate on
include:
• Inputs: These are the elements, triggers, and “things” needed to do the process. They are
typically nouns. They may be attributes such as names, addresses, etc. (Check boxes are
recommended to ease the fit/gap process that will take place later.)
• Process: Focus on key action steps, roles, and handoffs. These are typically verbs. Capture
what is manual and what is automated. There may be a need to have more than one swim
lane for the process to represent different roles.
• Outputs: Capture the results or products from the process. These are typically nouns.
• Interfaces: The system interfaces can include CSS, WMS, Mobile, AFM, etc.
9. Send the completed Visio Current State map to the BPO to proof read and give final approval.
Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 30 of 51
10. After approval from the BPO, send final Visio diagram to Lauren Turner
During the session, the
. Lauren will be
responsible for taking “To Do’s”, “Business Requirements”, “Wish List”, “Broken Processes”, etc.,
and transferring them to master lists.
Facilitator
1. Roles: Who does this process?
will also capture in separate boxes at the bottom:
2. Wish list items: What would make the process more efficient? (i.e. automation v. manual)
3. Mandates: What mandates guide this process?
4. Source Documents: Which documents are sources for this process?
5. Metrics: What metrics are used from this process? What metrics would be good to have in
the future?
6. “To Do’s” or action items that need follow-up. Be sure to capture who is responsible and
the delivery date.
7. Broken/inefficient Processes that need to be addressed (i.e. process is currently not working
well and needs decision to move forward.)
8. System Requirements not in RFP.
9. Reports that are generated from or used in this process.
The Facilitator
1. Is there any pre-work to be done prior to the Current State mapping? (ask in advance of the
meeting)
should also go over these points before or during the session:
2. Ask: Are there any metrics or data that you need or are used from this process?
3. Ask: Did we uncover any critical business requirements in the Current State exercise that
were not captured in the RFP? (This question is directed mostly to the Business Process
Owner.)
4. Ensure everyone have the account number to charge time to. 09905569 920000
5. Ensure the Business Process Owners have the “RFP – Requirements” document? It is
located at:
http://sharepoint/projects/CSS/Documents/Forms/AllItems.aspx?RootFolder=%2Fprojects%
2FCSS%2FDocuments%2FProject%20Compass%20RFP%20Requirements&FolderCTID=0x012
000CB730C15F3B8764DAD1AE2DFB621A326&View={B5B8C490-F8A1-4F64-B73A-
4100DA6FDE6A}&InitialTabId=Ribbon%2EDocument&VisibilityContext=WSSTabPersistence
7. Update the BPO on any issues.
8. Look for opportunities (wish list) to optimize processes and procedures by leveraging the
new system features and functionality. Ask open-ended questions to arrive at the best
information.
9. Be willing and open to change, agree to disagree and support decisions made with a positive
attitude.

Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 31 of 51
APPENDIX H: Current State Ground Rules Document

Review the mapping session guidelines and roles
Ground Rules
Everyone participates
One conversation at a time
Technology free zone (pagers/cells quieted)
Listen as an ally – Listen for understanding
Be respectful and open to the opinion of others
Respect confidentiality
Ask clarifying questions: “Can you give me an example?”
Ask probing questions: “What would happen if…?”
Start and finish on time

Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 32 of 51
APPENDIX I: BPI Current State Presentation

Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 33 of 51
APPENDIX J: Current State Mapping Schedule
Week One

Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday
Feb 8 2012 Feb 9 2012 Feb 10 2012
8:00-12:00 12:30-4:00 10:00-2:00
4 hrs 3.5 hrs.4 hrs
CR 701 CR 791 CR 701
Electric Meter Inventory Remote Disconnect/Reconnect Creating Jobs
Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:
Facilitator: Janna Leaf Facilitator: Janna Leaf Facilitator: Teresa Damon
Recorder: Michelle Heskett Recorder: DJ Kinservik Recorder: Michelle Heskett
Scribe: Bobbi Jo Pemberton Scribe: Renee Webb Scribe: Janna Leaf
Mollie Weis DJ Kinservik Steve Plewman
Sarah Sather Janna Leaf Janna Leaf
Mark Poirier Patty Batters Paul Good
Janna Leaf Jennifer Willis Ted Boyle
Greg Paulson Greg Paulson Lamont Miles
Mike Littrel/Carie Mourin Charmaine Hedit/Steve Aubuchon
Feb 8 2012
10:00-12:00
2 hrs
CR 702
Life Support
Attendees:
Facilitator: DJ Kinservik
Recorder: Amber Solverson
Scribe: Nancy Upham
Debi Neumauer
Missy Gores
Tamara Carter
Amber Solverson
Renee Webb
Current State Mapping Week 1 (Week of Feb. 6th)
Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 34 of 51
APPENDIX J: Current State Mapping Schedule Continued
Week 2

Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday
Feb 13th 2012 Feb 14th 2012 Feb 15th 2012 Feb 16th 2012 Feb 17th 2012
9:00-12:00 10:00-1:30 8:00-12:00 12:30-4:00 8:00-12:00
3 hrs 3.5 hrs 4 hrs.3.5 hrs 4 hrs
CR 140 CR 701 CR 702 CR 702 CR 702
Internal Needs Asses.Mapping of Service Agreements Leak Survey Follow-Up Comment PUC Complaint
Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:
Facilitator: Bob Weisbeck Facilitator: Teresa Damon Facilitator: Jody Morehouse Facilitator: DJ Kinservik Facilitator: DJ Kinservik
Recorder: Karen Kusel Recorder: Michelle Heskett Recorder: Michelle Heskett Recorder: Michelle Heskett Recorder: Michelle Heskett
Jerry Cox Scribe: Janna Leaf Scribe: Bobbi Jo Pemberton Scribe: Amber Solverson Scribe: Amber Solverson
Hull Steve Aubuchon/Connie Gorman Shawn Gallagher Amber Solverson Tamara Carter
Alan Lackner Paul Good/Lamont Miles Sonia Johnson Deb Noah Amanda Reinhardt
Karen Terpak Michelle Heskett/DJ Kinservik Kath Cordery Nancy Upham Amber Solverson
Andy Vickers Karen Cornwell/Janna Leaf Virgina Omoto Deb Noah
Steve Wenke Ted Boyle/Steve Plewman Mike Faulkenberry
Judy Olson Robert Cloward
Feb 13th 2012 Feb 14th 2012 Feb 15th 2012 Feb 16th 2012
1:00-5:00 8:00-12:00 12:00-4:00 8:00-11:00
4 hrs.4 hrs 4 hrs.2 hrs.
CR 702 CR 702 CR 702 CR 140
REVCAE, REVCSS, REVHBL, and
REVCORR Processing Leak Survey
CSSCAE & SJ451 GL & Projects
Transactions Processing
Veg. Mgmt. Process 1 of 2
(Building a Job)
Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:
Facilitator: Tami Judge Facilitator: Jody Morehouse Facilitator: Tami Judge Facilitator: Amber Gifford
Recorder: Amber Solverson Recorder: DJ Kinservik Recorder: Amber Solverson Recorder: Cherie Hirschberger
Scribe: Janna Leaf Scribe: Amber Solverson Scribe: Janna Leaf Scribe: None Needed
Karen Doran Shawn Gallagher Karen Doran Pam Luders
Mollie Weis Sonia Johnson Janna Leaf Larry Lee
Cindy Healy Robert Cloward Mollie Weis Chris Richardson
Janna Leaf Virgina Omoto Maureen Olson Cherie Hirschberger
Adam Munson Kevin Farrington Cindy Healy
Maureen Olson Mike Faulkenberry Adam Munson
Feb 14th 2012
12:30-4:00
3.5 hrs
CR 702
Field Request (EMS, Meter
Reading)
Attendees:
Facilitator: Renee Webb
Recorder: DJ Kinservik
Scribe: Amber Solverson
Nancy Upham
Theresa Reimer
Jackie Foss
Sarah Sather
Current State Mapping Week 2
Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 35 of 51
APPENDIX J: Current State Mapping Schedule Continued
Week 3

Week 4

Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday
Feb 20th 2012 Feb 21st 2012 Feb 22nd 2012 Feb 23rd 2012 Feb 24th 2012
10:00-2:00 8:00-12:00 8:00-12:00 1:00-4:00 9:00-12:00
4 hrs 4 hrs 4 hrs.3 hrs 3 hrs
CR 701 CR 701 CR 701 CR 145 CR 412A
Locates/Permits/Right of Way
Tasks Elec Meter Shop Testing
CSSCAE & SJ451 GL Transactions:
Suspense & Clearing of
Suspense; Unpostable; Return
Payments GOC Management Campaign Mgmt.
Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:
Facilitator: Teresa Damon Facilitator: Janna Leaf Facilitator: Tami Judge Facilitator: Bob Weisbeck Facilitator: DJ Kinservik
Recorder: Michelle Heskett Recorder: Amber Solverson Recorder: Michelle Heskett Recorder: Karen Kusel Recorder: Amber Solverson
Scribe: Janna Leaf Scribe: Nancy Upham Scribe: Janna Leaf Scribe Scribe: Kelly Conley
Nancy Carrol/Ted Boyle Robert Dodd Karen Doran Steve Esch Kelly Conley/Rob Wagner
Steve Aubuchon/Frank Binder Mark Poirier Janna Leaf Ron Hargrave Marry Cozza Broemeling
Todd Cornell/Paul Good Sarah Sather Gayle Gonser Alan Lackner Mary Tyrie/Scott Phipps
Lamont Miles/Connie Gorman Greg Paulson Angie Hayne Karen Terpak Colette Bottinelli
Genna Lehti/Michelle Heskett Judy Olson Denise Burns/Sue Senescall Andy Vickers Dana Anderson
Darrell Soyars/Tim Mair Jeannie Schmidt/Gudu Fischer Jerry Cox Scott Steele
Luann Weingart/Steve Plewman
Feb 21st 2012 Feb 22nd 2012 Feb 24th 2012
1:00-4:30 8:00-11:00 10:00-2:30
3.5 hrs.2 hrs.4.5 hrs
CR 702 CR 145 CR 702
Gas Unit Assembly Maintenance
Veg. Mgmt. - Process 2 of 2
(WMS/CSS)
Gas Trouble, Other See
Comments, CO Investigation
Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:
Facilitator: Kevin Farrington Facilitator: Amber Gifford Facilitator: Kevin Farrington
Recorder: Bobbi Jo Pemberton Recorder: Cherie Hirschberger Recorder: Michelle Heskett
Scribe: Nancy Upham Scribe: Amber Gifford Scribe: Bobbi Jo Pemberton
Dan Wisdom Pam Luders David Howell
Janna Leaf Larry Lee Jody Morehouse
David Howell Chris Richardson Mike Littrel
Mitch Cornwell Cherie Hirschberger
Current State Mapping Week 3
Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday
Feb 28th 2012 Feb 29th 2012
8:00-12:00 1:00-4:00
4 hrs.3 hrs.
CR 702 CR 702
Code 5, Avista Side/Customer Code 9 and Grade 1
Attendees:Attendees:
Facilitator: Kevin Farrington Facilitator: Kevin Farrington
Recorder: Amber Solverson Recorder: Amber Solverson
Scribe: Bobbi Jo Pemberton Scribe: Bobbi Jo Pemberton
Mike Littrel David Howell
David Howell Mike Littrel
Linda Burger Linda Burger
Jenny Bushnell Jenny Bushnell
Current State Mapping Week 4
Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 36 of 51
APPENDIX J: Current State Mapping Schedule Continued
Week 5

Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday
March 5th 2012 March 7th 2012 March 8th 2012
10:00-2:00 8:00-10:00 1:00-4:30
4 hrs 2 hrs 3.5 hrs.
CR 701 CR 701 CR 702
Remarks Field/Work Folders Refunds & Unclaimed Processing Moveable Pipe Inspection
Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:
Facilitator: Teresa Damon Facilitator: Tami Judge Facilitator: Kevin Farrington
Recorder: Michelle Heskett Recorder: Amber Solverson Recorder: Amber Solverson
Scribe: Janna Leaf Scribe: Janna Leaf Scribe: Nancy Upham
DJ Kinservik/Michelle Heskett Karen Doran Linda Burger
Steve Aubuchon/Steve Plewman Janna Leaf David Howell
Sheila Ward/Renee Webb Laura Brittain Jenny Bushnell
Frank Binder/Ted Boyle Amanda Reinhardt
Lamont Miles/Sheryl Florance Kerry Shroy
Paul Good/Patti Horbiowski
March 7th 2012 March 8th 2012
10:00-12:00 10:00-2:00
2 hrs 4 hrs.
CR 701 CR 701
Sales Tickets Developments Financials
Attendees:Attendees:
Facilitator: Tami Judge Facilitator: Teresa Damon
Recorder: Amber Solverson Recorder: Michelle Heskett
Scribe: Janna Leaf Scribe: Janna Leaf
Karen Doran Connie Gorman
Janna Leaf Ken Carlson
Tami Judge Sheryl Florance
Gayle Gonser Linda Fleming
Howard Grimsrud Michelle Heskett
Kerry Shroy Paul Good
Steve Aubuchon
Frank Binder/Lamont Miles
Ted Boyle/Steve Plewman
March 7th 2012
1:00-5:00
4 hrs.
CR 702
Gas Trouble, Damage No Leak/
Residual Follow-Up
Attendees:
Facilitator: Kevin Farrington
Recorder: Michelle Heskett
Scribe: Margie Clarity
Karen Doran
Janna Leaf
Tami Judge
Gayle Gonser
Howard Grimsrud
Kerry Shroy
Current State Mapping Week 5
Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 37 of 51
APPENDIX J: Current State Mapping Schedule Continued
Week 6
Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday
March 12th 2012 March 13th 2012 March 14th 2012 March 15th 2012 March 16th 20129:00-12:00 9:30-12:00 10:00-2:30 12:30-4:00 1:00-3:00
3 hrs 2.5 hrs 4.5 hrs 3.5 hrs 2 hrs
CR 145 CR702 CR 701 CR 701 CR 701
GCM Mgmt Switched Meters
Assigning Materials/Asphalt
Concrete Repair
Retire Elec Met Equip./Meter
Test Boards Online Cash/Medford
Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:Facilitator: Bob Weisbeck Facilitator: Janna Leaf Facilitator: Teresa Damon Facilitator: Janna Leaf Facilitator: Tami Judge
Recorder: Karen Kusel Recorder: Margie Clarity Recorder: Michelle Heskett Recorder: Michelle Heskett Recorder: Michelle Heskett
Scribe: Weisbeck to Provide Scribe: Deb Noah Scribe: Janna Leaf Scribe: Deb Noah Scribe: Janna LeafAndy Vickers Theresa Reimer Michelle Heskett/Steve Aubuchon Janna Leaf Karen Doran
Ron Hargrave Gayle Gonser Frank Binder/Paul Good Mark Poirier Janna Leaf
Alan Lackner Heather Acord David Scalido/Ted Boyle Sarah Sather Denise BurnsKaren Terpak Karen Cornwell/Lamont Miles Mollie Weis Angela Hayne
Steve Wenke Steve Plewman/Marshall Law Robert Dodd Sue Senescall
Wiggins/Cox Maria Sullivan/Patti Horobiowski Greg Paulson Debbie Williams
March 12th 2012 March 13th 2012 March 15th 2012 March 16th 2012
8:30-11:30 10:00-12:00 8:00-11:00 3:00-5:003 hrs 2 hrs 2 hrs.2 hrs
CR 702 CR 412 B CR 702 CR 701
Special Handling
Tracking
Enrollments/Terminations
Client Relationship Management, Proactive / Reactive Monthly
Reporting
Online-Cash/Cust Serv -
Recoveries
Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:Facilitator: DJ Kinservik Facilitator: DJ Kinservik Facilitator: DJ Kinservik Facilitator: Tami Judge
Recorder: Nancy Upham Recorder: Amber Solverson Recorder: Amber Solverson Recorder: Michelle Heskett
Scribe: Deb Noah Scribe: Kelly Conley Scribe: Kelly Conley Scribe: Janna LeafTheresa Reimer Kelly Conley Ann Carey Karen Doran
Amber Solverson Mary Cozza Broemeling Sue Baldwin Tami Judge
Deb Noah Mary Tyrie Catherine Bryan Janna LeafColette Bottinelli Kerry Shroy Denise Burns
Dana Anderson/ Scott Phipps Angela Hayne/Amanda Ghering
Scott Steele/Rob Wagner Sue Senescall/Kim Styles
March 13th 2012 March 15th 2012 March 16th 2012
12:30-4:00 1:00-5:00 8:30-11:303.4 4 hrs.3 hrs.
CR 702 CR 702 CR 701
Diversion AC Inspection
Elec Mtr Shop Testing - Selection
and Reporting
Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:
Facilitator: Renee Webb Facilitator: Jody Morehouse Facilitator: Janna Leaf
Recorder: Michelle Heskett Recorder: Amber Solverson Recorder: Bobbie Jo Pemberton
Scribe: Nancy Upham Scribe: Bobbi Jo Pemberton Scribe: Nancy Upham
Alene Clayton Shawn Gallagher Judy Olson
Heather Acord Sonia Johnson Bob Hooper
Greg Paulson Erika Jacobs Shana Gail
Theresa Reimer Robert Cloward Mark Poirier
Kim Casey Virginia Omoto Sarah Sather
Mike Faulkenberry/Jenny BushnellGreg Paulson
March 13th 2012 March 16th 2012
8:00-11:00 8:30-11:30
3 hrs.3 hrs.
CR 140 CR 701
Maps, Work Plan, Inspection
Work, FollowUp Work
Elec Mtr Shop Testing - Selection
and Reporting
Attendees:Attendees:
Facilitator: Amber Gifford Facilitator: Janna Leaf
Recorder: Cherie Hirschberger Recorder: Deb Noah
Scribe: Amber Gifford Scribe: Amber Solverson
Pam Luders Judy Olson
Mark Gabert Bob Hooper
Ivan Rounds Shana Gail
Cherie Hirschberger Mark Poirier
Sarah Sather
Greg Paulson
March 16th 2012
10:00-2:00
4 hrs.
CR 702
Moveable Pipe Pt. 2 Follow-Up
etc.
Attendees:
Facilitator: Kevin Farrington
Recorder: Margie Clarity
Scribe: DJ Kinservik
Linda Burger
David Howell
Jenny Bushnell
Current State Mapping Week 6
Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 38 of 51
APPENDIX J: Current State Mapping Schedule Continued
Week 7
Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday
March 19th 2012 March 20th 2012 March 21st 2012 March 22nd 2012 March 23rd 2012
10:00-2:00 8:30-11:30 12:30-2:30 1:30-4:00 8:30-11:30
4 hrs 2 hrs 2 hrs 3.5 hrs 3 hrs
CR 701 CR 702 CR 412B CR 701 CR 702
Job Design/Estimates Third Party Notification Communication Preferences
DSM, Residential Rebate
Processing & Payment Information Request
Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:
Facilitator: Teresa Damon Facilitator: DJ Kinservik Facilitator: DJ Kinservik Facilitator: DJ Kinservik Facilitator: DJ Kinservik
Recorder: Michelle Heskett Recorder: Amber Solverson Recorder: Amber Solverson Recorder: Amber Solverson Recorder: Deb Noah
Scribe: Janna Leaf Scribe: Deb Noah Scribe: Kelly Conley Scribe: Rachelle Humphrey Scribe: Amber Solverson
Steve Plewman/Michelle Heskett Amanda Reinhardt Kelly Conley Rachelle Humphrey Amber Solverson
Lamont Miles/Mark Hansen Tamara Carter Mary Cozza Broemeling Chris Drake Deb Noah
Ted Boyle/Paul Good Deb Noah Mary Tyrie/Tom Heavey Renee Coelho Nancy Upham
Kelly Donahoue/Steve Aubuchon Colette Bottinelli Renesha Conley/Kathy Carpenter Rachelle Humphrey
Frank Binder Dana Anderson/Mary Inman Roxanne Williams
Scott Steele/Scott Phipps Kerry Shroy/Stacie Friend
March 20th 2012 March 21st 2012 March 22nd 2012 March 23rd 2012
12:30-4:00 8:00-12:00 8:00-12:30 9:00-12:00
3.5 hrs 4 hrs.4.5 hrs.3 hrs
CR 702 CR 702 CR 702 CR 145
Collection Not. Action Card Mins.Cathodic Annual Inspections
Meter Reading Access Problems,
Reading Remarks and
Instructions
Construction Mgmt and
Inspection
Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:
Facilitator: Renee Webb Facilitator: Jody Morehouse Facilitator: Janna Leaf Facilitator: Bob Weisbeck
Recorder: Michelle Heskett Recorder: Deb Noah Recorder: Deb Noah Recorder: Karen Kusel
Scribe: Deb Noah Scribe: Bobbie Jo Pemberton Scribe: Michelle Heskett Scribe: Provided by Weisbeck
Amanda Reinhardt Mike Faulkenberry Jackie Foss Cody Krogh
Tamara Carter Gary Douglas Allyn Smith Debbie Biggs
Pamela Horne Robin Hunter John Hamill
Erika Jacobs Eric Atkinson
Lin Miller
Tammie Miller/Tom Zimmerer
March 20th 2012
1:00-4:00
3 hrs.
CR 145
Engineer Work Assignment
Process
Attendees:
Facilitator: Bob Weisbeck
Recorder: Karen Kusel
Scribe: Provided by Weisbeck
Steve Wenke
Glen Farmer
Mike Gonnella
John Hamill
Jason Graham
Kristina Newhouse/Ryan Bean
March 20th 2012
1:00-5:00
4 hrs.
CR 701
AC Follow Up Orders
Attendees:
Facilitator: Jody Morehouse
Recorder: Amber Solverson
Scribe: Bobbi Jo Pemberton
Shawn Gallagher
Sonia Johnson
Kathy Cordery
Erika Jacobs
Robert Cloward/ Jenny Bushnell
Virginia Omoto/Mike Faulkenberry
Current State Mapping Week 7
Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 39 of 51
APPENDIX J: Current State Mapping Schedule Continued
Week 8

Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday
March 26th 2012 March 27th 2012 March 28th 2012 March 29th 2012 March 30th 2012
8:00-5:00 1:00-5:00 10:00-2:00 9:00-11:00 8:00-12:00
8 hrs 4 hrs.4 hrs.2 hrs.4 hrs.
CR 701 CR 701 CR 701 CR 428 CR 702
Oracle AR processes that may be
moved to new CIS system Isolated Steel Survey
Work location tabs or premise-
assigning the jobs
DSM, Low Income Weatherization
Processing and Payment Tax Reporting
Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:
Facilitator: Tami Judge Facilitator: Jody Morehouse Facilitator: Teresa Damon Facilitator: DJ Kinservik Facilitator: Tami Judge
Recorder: Michelle Heskett Recorder: Amber Solverson Recorder: Michelle Heskett Recorder: Amber Solverson Recorder: Deb Noah
Scribe: Janna Leaf Scribe: Nancy Upham Scribe: Janna Leaf Scribe: Rachelle Humphrey Scribe: Janna Leaf
Karen Doran Gary Douglas Steve Plewman/Lamont Miles Rachelle Humphrey Karen Doran
Janna Leaf Pamela Horne Sheryl Florance/Paul Good Renee Coelho Janna Leaf
Gudu Fischer Erika Jacobs Ted Boyle/Steve Aubuchon Chris Drake Catherine Cooper
Monica Bannon Mike Faulkenberry Frank Binder/Connie Gorman Kristine Meyer Yvonne Cook
Jeannie Schmidt Michelle Heskett Don Falkner
Catherine Mueller
March 26th 2012 March 27th 2012 March 29th 2012
1:00-5:00 1:00-5:00 12:30-4:00
4 hrs.4 hrs.3.5 hrs
CR 702 CR 702 CR 702
CP Follow Up Cash Processing Returned Payments
Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:
Facilitator: Jody Morehouse Facilitator: Tami Judge Facilitator: Renee Webb
Recorder: Amber Solverson Recorder: Bobbi Jo Pemberton Recorder: Michelle Heskett
Scribe: Deb Noah Scribe: Janna Leaf Scribe: Janna Leaf
Gary Douglas Karen Doran Kym Stiles
Gary Horne Janna Leaf Deb Noah
Katy Cordrey Denise Burns Amanda Reinhardt
Erika Jacobs Angela Hayne
Mike Faulkenberry Sue Senescall
Rosemary Coulson/Diane Thorne
March 29th 2012
1:00-4:00
3 hrs.
CR 145
As Built Drawing Mgmt.
Attendees:
Facilitator: Bob Weisbeck
Recorder: Karen Kusel
Scribe: Weisbeck to Provide
Steve Wenke/Mike Gonnella
John Hamill/Glen Farmer
Ron Hargrave/Mary Jensen
Tom Whitehead/Jeff Marsh
Clint Laws
Current State Mapping Week 8
Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 40 of 51
APPENDIX J: Current State Mapping Schedule Continued
Week 9

Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday
April 2nd 2012 April 4th 2012 April 6th 2012
8:30-11:30 10:00-2:30 8:00-11:00
3 hrs 4.5 hrs 2 hrs
CR 702 CR 701 CR 702
Email Address Job Scheduling
Sales including Competitive
Situations and Contract
Negotiation
Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:
Facilitator: DJ Kinservik Facilitator: Teresa Damon Facilitator: DJ Kinservik
Recorder: Deb Noah Recorder: Michelle Heskett Recorder: Amber Solverson
Scribe: Nancy Upham Scribe: Janna Leaf Scribe: Janna Leaf
Amber Solverson Lamont Miles/Ted Boyle Ann Carey
Nancy Upham Steve Aubuchon Sue Baldwin
Stacie Friend Deb Denney/Katy Cordery Catherine Bryan
Deb Noah Steve Plewman/Paul Good
Charmaine Heidt/Eric Rosentrater
Kelly Donohue/Shane Pacini
Current State Mapping Week 9
Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 41 of 51
APPENDIX J: Current State Mapping Schedule Continued
Week 10

Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday
April 9th 2012 April 10th 2012 April 11th 2012 April 12th 2012 April 13th 2012
1:00-4:00 10:00-3:00 9:00-11:00 8:30-11:30 9:00-12:00
3 hrs.5 hrs. 2 hrs.2 hrs.3 hrs.
CR 702 CR 701 CR 428 CR 702 CR 145
Newsletters/Customer
Communication
Invoice Job prior to construction,
Invoice Job when closed
Net-Metering: Renewable
(Schedule 63) Merge Customer
Engineer Information
Management
Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:
Facilitator: DJ Kinservik Facilitator: Teresa Damon Facilitator: DJ Kinservik Facilitator: DJ Kinservik Facilitator: Bob Weisbeck
Recorder: Amber Solverson Recorder: Michelle Heskett Recorder: Amber Solverson Recorder: Deb Noah Recorder: Karen Kusel
Scribe: Janna Leaf Scribe: Janna Leaf Scribe: Rachelle Humphrey Scribe: Amber Solverson Scribe: Provided by Weisbeck
Ann Carey Linda Fleming/Tia Benjamin Rachelle Humphrey Deb Noah Steve Wenke
Kelly Conley Jeanie Schmidt/Lamont Miles Renee Coelho Gayle Gonser Mike Gonnella
Sue Baldwin Steve Aubuchon/Steve Plewman Chris Drake Jan Casis John Hamill
Cathreine Bryan Paul Good/Raven Perry Ann Carey Betsy Townsend Glen Farmer
Michelle Heskett Ron Hargrave/Mary Jensen
Frank Binder Andy Vickers
April 9th 2012 April 11th 2012
8:30-12:00 1:00-5:00
1.5 hrs.4 hrs.
CR 702 CR 702
CIAC's
Rates - LIRAP Application
Process
Attendees:Attendees:
Facilitator: Catherine Mueller Facilitator: Janna Leaf
Recorder: Bobbi Jo Pemberton Recorder
Scribe: Janna Leaf Scribe
Howard Grimsrud Jennifer Smith
Sue Mullerleile Ken Humphries
April 11th 2012
9:30-3:30
6 hrs.
CR 701
Service Work Resolution
Attendees:
Facilitator: Teresa Damon
Recorder: Michelle Heskett
Scribe: Janna Leaf
Lamont Miles
Steve Plewman
Paul Good
Michelle Heskett
Current State Mapping Week 10
Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 42 of 51
APPENDIX J: Current State Mapping Schedule Continued
Week 11

Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday
April 16th 2012 April 17th 2012 April 18th 2012 April 19th 2012 April 20th 2012
8:30-11:30 10:00-3:00 1:00-3:00 9:30-12:00 8:30-11:30
2 hrs.5 hrs.2 hrs.2.5 hrs 3 hrs.
CR 702 CR 701 CR 702 CR 145 CR 701
Problem Customer
Receive Payments-Process
Refunds for Line Extension
Certificates Uncollectiable Analysis Invoicing Process C/I DSM Projects
Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:
Facilitator: DJ Kinservik Facilitator: Teresa Damon Facilitator: Tami Judge Facilitator: Bob Weisbeck Facilitator: DJ Kinservik
Recorder Recorder Recorder Recorder Recorder
Scribe Scribe Scribe Scribe Scribe
Amber Solverson Jeannie Schmidt/Steve Aubuchon Janna Leaf Cody Krogh Ann Carey
Deb Noah Steve Plewman/Paul Good Ian McLelland Tim Carlberg Sue Baldwin
Gayle Gonser Linda Fleming/Doug Donahoo Amanda Reinhardt Debbie Briggs Catherine Bryan
Greg Paulson Frank Binder/Raven Perry Catherine Cooper Andrea Marlowe Camielle Martin/Kerry Shroy
Mike Littrel Ted Boyle/Lamont Miles Andy Vickers/Tammie Miller Greta Zink/Lorri Kirstein
Michelle Heskett/Judy Olson Steve Wenke Renee Coelho/Tom Lienhard
April 19th 2012 April 20th 2012
8:30-12:30 1:00-4:30
4 hrs 3.5 hrs.
CR 702 CR 702
Meter Reading Rerouting,
Problem Cust, Apt Usage, ERT
Search Exposed Pipe (Session 2)
Attendees:Attendees:
Facilitator: Janna Leaf Facilitator: Kevin Farrington
Recorder Recorder
Scribe Scribe
Jackie Foss David Howell
Robin Hunter Linda Burger
Allyn Smith Sonia Johnson
April 19th 2012
1:00-3:30
2.5 hrs
CR 702
CAE Approval Process
Attendees:
Facilitator: DJ Kinservik
Recorder
Scribe
Galen Lorenz
Darrin Belgarde
Janna Leaf
April 19th 2012
1:00-4:30
3.5 hrs.
CR 701
Exposed Pipe (Session 1)
Attendees:
Facilitator: Kevin Farrington
Recorder
Scribe
David Howell
Linda Burger
Sonia Johnson
Liz St. Mark
Current State Mapping Week 11
Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 43 of 51
APPENDIX J: Current State Mapping Schedule Continued
Week 12
Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday
April 23rd 2012 April 24th 2012 April 25th 2012 April 26th 2012 April 27th 2012
8:30-11:30 8:30-12:00 8:30-11:30 9:00-10:00 9:00-11:00
3 hrs.3.5 hrs 3 hrs.1 hr.2 hrs
CR 702 CR 702 CR 702 Medford Office CR 702
Code Word
Meter Read Exceptions, On Cycle
Billing, Estimation Current State Rate Schedule Change
Current State Log and Manage
Audit Requests Request Duplicate Bill
Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:
Facilitator: DJ Kinservik Facilitator: Janna Leaf Facilitator: DJ Kinservik Facilitator: Kerry Shroy Facilitator: DJ Kinservik
Recorder Recorder Recorder Recorder Recorder
Scribe Scribe Scribe Scribe Scribe
Amber Solverson Theresa Reimer Gayle Gonser Lisa McGarity Amber Solverson
Deb Noah Heather Acord Jan Cassis
Nancy Upham Mollie Weis Theresa Reimer
DJ Kinservik
April 23rd 2012 April 24th 2012 April 25th 2012 April 26th 2012 April 27th 2012
9:00-1:00 12:30-3:30 9:30-3:30 10:00-11:00 8:00-12:00
4 hrs.3 hrs. 6 hrs.1 hr. 4 hrs.
CR 701 CR 702 CR 701 Medford Office CR 701
Gas Meter Annual Test
Selection and Performance
Reporting
Remove and Change Metered /
Unmetered Services Job Stage Notebook - Status Jobs
Process Weatherization Incentive
Payments
Health Check Monitors (Cent.
Disp)
Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:
Facilitator: Janna Leaf Facilitator: DJ Kinservik Facilitator: Teresa Damon Facilitator: Kerry Shroy Facilitator: Jody Morehouse
Recorder Recorder Recorder Recorder Recorder
Scribe Scribe Scribe Scribe Scribe
Steve Williams Heather Acord Ted Boyle/Paul Good Lisa McGarity Jeff Potter
David Howell Theresa Reimer Steve Aubuchon/Judy Olson Mike Littrel
Judy Olson Sarah Sather Deb Denney/Frank Binder Garth Brandon
Dan Whicker Gayle Gonser Patti Horbiowski/Linda Fleming Mike McAllisster
Janna Leaf Karen Cornwell/Michelle Heskett Reuben Arts
April 23rd 2012 April 24th 2012 April 26th 2012 April 27th 2012
9:00-12:00 10:00-2:30 11:00-12:00 12:00-4:00
3 hrs.4.5 hrs.1 hr.4 hrs.
CR 145 CR 701 Medford Office CR 702
Unplanned Work (Drop in,
Equipment Failures)
Ability to Associate Jobs, Ability
to Change Jobs Weatherization Reporting
Regulator Station Inspections,
Session 1 - Industrial meter sets,
reg stations, master meters
Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:
Facilitator: Bob Weisbeck Facilitator: Teresa Damon Facilitator: Kertry Shroy Facilitator: Keving Farrington
Recorder Recorder Recorder Recorder
Scribe Scribe Scribe Scribe
Tim Carlberg Lamont Miles/Frank Binder Lisa Mcgarity Sonia Johnson
Steve Wenke Ted Boyle/Sheryl Florance David Howell
Greg Lancaster Sheila Ward/Steve Plewman Candace Baker
Randy Pierce Steve Aubuchon/Patti Horobiowski
Alan Lackner Carie Mourin/Mike Littrel
Jerry Cox/Andy Vickers Michelle Heskett/Paul Good
April 26th 2012
12:30-4:00
3.5 hrs.
Trailer
Rates: Customer Research
Process
Attendees:
Facilitator: Janna Leaf
Recorder
Scribe
Ken Humphires
Shawn Bonfield
April 26th 2012
1:00-4:00
3 hrs.
CR 701
Remarks
Attendees:
Facilitator: DJ Kinservik
Recorder
Scribe
Amber Solverson
Deb Noah
Nancy Upham
Current State Mapping Week 12
Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 44 of 51
APPENDIX J: Current State Mapping Schedule Continued
Week 13

Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday
April 30th 2012 May 1st 2012 May 2nd 2012 May 3rd 2012 May 4th 2012
9:30-11:30 9:00-12:00 8:30-11:30 1:00-4:00 8:00-12:00
2 hrs.3 hrs.2 hrs.3 hrs.4 hrs.
CR 701 CR 145 CR 702 CR 145 CR 702
Propertry Removal Notice Budget Allocation Estates
Work Integration Between GPSS,
Transmission and Substation
Design OMT Electric Trouble
Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:
Facilitator: Teresa Damon Facilitator: Bob Weisbeck Facilitator: DJ Kinservik Facilitator: Bob Weis Facilitator: Jody Morehouse
Recorder Recorder Recorder Recorder Recorder
Scribe Scribe Scribe Scribe Scribe
Lamont Miles/Linda Fleming Tim Carlberg Amber Solverson Andy Vickers Mike Littrel
Ted Boyle/Steve Plewman Steve Wenke Deb Noah Greg Lancaster Garth Brandon
Patti Horobiowski/Janna Leaf Andy Vickers Amanda Reinhardt Randy Pierce Jeff Potter
Michelle Heskett/Paul Good Andrea Marlowe Nancy Upham Cody Krogh Mike McAllistser
Steve Aubuchon/Frank Binder Alan Lacker Mike Magruder Reuben Arts
Jerry Cox Ken Sweigart
April 30th 2012 May 1st 2012 May 2nd 2012 May 3rd 2012
12:00-2:00 9:00-1:00 8:00-12:00 8:00-12:00
2 hrs.4 hrs 4 hrs.4 hrs.
CR 701 CR 701 CR 701 CR 702
Job Stage Notebook
Gas Meter Equipment Inventory,
Retire Gas Meter Equip, Tracking
Gas Meter Equip.Gas Jobs by Engineers Gas Service Mobile Order
Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:
Facilitator: Teresa Damon Facilitator: Janna Leaf Facilitator: Jody Morehouse Facilitator: Jody Morehouse
Recorder Recorder Recorder Recorder
Scribe Scribe Scribe Scribe
Steve Aubuchon Steve Williams Jeff Webb Jeff Potter
Frank Binder/Steve Plewman David Howell David Smith Mike Littrel
Patti Horobiowski Judy Olson Liz St. Mark Garth Brandon
Ted Boyle Sonia Johnson Mike McAllister
Judy Olson Reuben Arts
Lamont Miles
Current State Mapping Week 13
Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 45 of 51
APPENDIX J: Current State Mapping Schedule Continued
Week 14

Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday
May 8th 2012 May 9th 2012 May 10th 2012 May 11th 2012
1:00-4:30 9:30-3:30 8:30-12:00 10:00-4:00
3.5 hrs 6 hrs 3.5 hrs 6 hrs.
CR 702 CR 701 CR 702 CR 702
Transportation Tree Trimming/Invoice from Contractors
Edits (Payroll, Transportation,
A/P)
Regulator Stations, Farm Tap and
Odorizer Inspections
Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:
Facilitator: Catherine Mueller Facilitator: Teresa Damon Facilitator: Catherine Mueller Facilitator: Kevin Farrington
Recorder Recorder Recorder Recorder
Scribe Scribe Scribe Scribe
Howard Grimsrud Eric Rosentrater/Larry Lee/Plewman Howard Grimsrud Sonia Johnson
Sue Mullerleile Julie Lee/Vicki Tallman/Miles Sue Mullerleile Candace Baker
Tami Judge Raven Perry/Paul Good Tami Judge David Howell
Karen Doran Ted Boyle/Steve Aubuchon Karen Doran
Linda Fleming Frank Binder/Patti Horobiowski Linda Fleming
John Hanna/Pam Luders/Michelle Heskett
May 8th 2012 May 9th 2012 May 10th 2012
9:00-1:00 12:00-3:00 12:30-4:00
4 hrs.3 hrs.3.5 hrs.
CR 701 CR 145 CR 701
Gas Meter Testing - New Meters,
Manual Results, Test Board and
3rd Party Results Budget Approval Process
Meter Reading Skip Reads, Prep
Table, Code Table, Mark Sense
Reads
Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:
Facilitator: Janna Leaf Facilitator: Bob Weisbeck Facilitator: Janna Leaf
Recorder Recorder Recorder
Scribe Scribe Scribe
Steve Williams Andy Vickers Jackie Foss
David Howell Jerry Cox Robin Hunter
Judy Olson Alan Lackner Allyn Smith
Andrew Marlowe
May 9th 2012
8:30-12:30
4 hrs.
CR 702
OMT Meter Ping Tool
Attendees:
Facilitator: Jody Morehouse
Recorder
Scribe
Jeff Potter
Mike Littrel
Garth Brandon
Reuben Arts
Mike McAllister
Current State Mapping Week 14
Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 46 of 51
APPENDIX J: Current State Mapping Schedule Continued
Week 15

Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday
May 15th 2012 May 16th 2012 May 17th 2012 May 18th 2012
10:00-3:00 8:00-12:00 8:30-12:00 9:00-12:30
Duration 4 hrs.3.5 hrs 3.5 hrs
CR 701 CR 702 CR 702 CR 702
Closing Job Pipeline Markers FA & Depriciation
Projects Accounting - PA (system
generated journal)
Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:
Facilitator: Teresa Damon Facilitator: Jody Morehouse Facilitator: Catherine Mueller Facilitator: Catherine Mueller
Recorder Recorder Recorder Recorder
Scribe Scribe Scribe Scribe
Steve Plewman Mike Faulkenberry Kellee Quick Tami Judge
Paul Good Erika Jacobs Tami Judge Karen Doran
Lamont Miles Liz St. Mark Karen Doran Howard Grimsrud
Michelle Heskett Howard Grimsrud Sue Mullerleile
Sue Mullerleile
May 15th 2012 May 16th 2012 May 17th 2012 May 18th 2012
9:00-12:00 12:30-4:00 9:00-1:00 1:00-4:00
3 hrs.3.5 hrs.4 hrs 3 hrs.
CR 145 CR 701 CR 701 CR 702
Material Procurement Street Light Setup and Billing
Gas Rotary and Turbine Meter
Testing, Tracking Correctors and
Telemetry Equipment
Regulator Stations, Electronic
Instrument Inspections
Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:
Facilitator: Bob Weisbeck Facilitator: Janna Leaf Facilitator: Janna Leaf Facilitator: Kevin Farrington
Recorder Recorder Recorder Recorder
Scribe Scribe Scribe Scribe
Andy Vickers Karen Cornwell Steve Williams David Howell
Steve Wenke Teresa Damon David Howell Sonia Johnson
John Hamill Gayle Gonser Judy Olson Candace Baker
Karen Terpak Mollie Weis Steve Williams
Randy Pierce Bart Janson
Greg Lancaster/Ron Gray
May 15th 2012
1:00-5:00
4 hrs.
CR 702
OMT Transformer Loading Tool
Attendees:
Facilitator: Jody Morehouse
Recorder
Scribe
Mike Littrel
Garth Brandon
Reuben Arts
Mike McAllister
Jeff Potter
Current State Mapping Week 15
Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 47 of 51
APPENDIX J: Current State Mapping Schedule Continued
Week 16

Week 17

Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday
May 22nd 2012 May 23rd 2012 May 24th 2012 May 25th 2012
9:00-1:00 1:00-5:00 1:00-5:00 9:00-12:00
4 hrs.4 hrs.4 hrs.3 hrs.
CR 702 CR 702 CR 702 CR 145
Process OMT Gas Trouble Current State SCADA Gas Alarms Design Reivew Process
Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:
Facilitator: Janna Leaf Facilitator: Jody Morehouse Facilitator: Jody Morehouse Facilitator: Bob Weisbeck
Recorder Recorder Recorder Recorder
Scribe Scribe Scribe Scribe
Steve Williams Mike Littrel Jeff Potter Steve Wenke
David Howell Jeff Potter Reuben Arts Mike Gonnella
Sonia Johnson Garth Brandon Mike Littrel John Hamill
Jenny Bushnell Reuben Arts Garth Brandon Glen Farmer
Mike McAllister Mike McAllister Mary Jensen/Kristina Newhouse
Brian Vandenberg/Jeremy Winkle
May 25th 2012
10:00-3:00
5 hrs.
CR 702
Regulator Stations, Relief
Capacity Review, Unscheduled
Reg Station or meterset work
Attendees:
Facilitator: Kevin Farrington
Recorder
Scribe
David Howell
Jenny Bushnell
Sonia Johnson
Current State Mapping Week 16
Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday
May 29th 2012 May 31st 2012
8:00-12:00 1:00-4:00
4 hrs.3 hrs.
CR 702 CR 145
Valve Maintenance Project Management
Attendees:Attendees:
Facilitator: Kevin Farrington Facilitator: Bob Weisbeck
Recorder Recorder
Scribe Scribe
Sonia Johnson Tim Carlberg
Jenny Bushnell Steve Wenke
Condace Baker Andy Vickers
David Howell Mike Gonnella
Liz St. Mark John Hamill/Cody Krogh
Mike Littrel Glen Farmer/Ron Hargrave
Current State Mapping Week 17
Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 48 of 51
APPENDIX J: Current State Mapping Schedule Continued
Week 18

Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday
June 5th 2012 June 7th 2012 June 8th 2012
8:00-12:00 1:00-4:30 9:30-12:00
4 hrs.3.5 hrs.2.5 hrs
CR 702 CR 702 CR 12 - Dollar Road
Valve Maintenance
Obsolete Manufacturer and Part
Number Health Check Monitoring
Attendees:Attendees:Attendees:
Facilitator: Kevin Farrington Facilitator: Kevin Farrington Facilitator: Kevin Farrington
Recorder Recorder Recorder
Scribe Scribe Scribe
Sonia Johnson David Howell Sonia Johnson
Jenny Bushnell Linda Burger Jenny Bushnell
Condace Baker Robin Burchett Candace Baker
David Howell Dan Wisdom David Howell
Liz St. Mark
Mike Littrel
Current State Mapping Week 18
Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 49 of 51
Appendix K: Current State Mapping Gantt Schedule

Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 50 of 51
Appendix L: Current State Mapping Resources by Business Area
Contact Center: Customer Care Contact Center: Credit and Collections Contact Center: Billing and Bill Printing
Facilitator: DJ Kinservik Facilitator: Renee Webb Facilitator: Janna Leaf
SMEs:SMEs:SMEs:
Nancy Upham Charmaine Heidt Kym Stiles Patty Batters Maureen Olson Karen Cornwell
Amber Solverson Gayle Gonser Deb Noah Nancy Upham Galen Lorenz Heather Acord
Jan Cassis Renee Webb Amanda Reinhardt Jackie Foss Darrin Belgarde DJ Kinservik
Tamara Carter Janna Leaf Heather Acord Sarah Sather Sandy Honn Teresa Reimer
Teresa Damon Stacie Friend Jennifer Willis Teresa Reimer
Debi Neumeier Deb Noah
Missy Gores Rachelle Humphrey Electric Meter Shop
Betsy Townsend Teresa Reimer Rates Facilitator: Janna Leaf
Facilitator: Ken Humphries SMEs:
Treasury and Finance SMEs:Greg Paulson Mollie Weis
Facilitator: Tami Judge Ken Humphries Jen Smith Judy Olson Robert Dodd
SMEs:Gina Armstrong Shawn Bonfield Joe Miller Bob Hooper Shana Gail
Karen Doran Gayle Gonser Sarah Sather Mark Poirier
Tami Judge Angie Hayne
Mollie Weis Denise Burns Gas Meter Shop Asset Maint: Vegetation Management
Rick Lloyd Ian McLelland Facilitator: Janna Leaf Facilitator: Amber Gifford
Cameron Dunlop Carolyn Groome SMEs:SMEs:
Maureen Olsen Jeannie Schmidt Steve Williams Sonia Johnson Pam Luders Larry Lee
Cindy Healy Gudu Fischer David Howell Mollie Weis Steve Schwartz Rob Wagner
Monica Bannon Catherine Bowden Dan Whicker Judy Olson Derek Babcock Rob Cloward
Kym Stiles-Lewis Amanda Gehrig Michelle Muck Chris Richardson
Amanda Reinhardt Eric Bowles Kipp Dennis Iban Lucera
Janna Leaf Sue Senescall Electric and Gas Operations
Adam Munson Laura Brittain Facilitator: Teresa Damon Asset Maint: Wood Pole Maintenance
SMEs:Facilitator: Amber Gifford
Utility Plant Accounting Paul Good Jeannie Schmidt SMEs:
Facilitator: Tami Judge Charmaine Heidt Vicki Tallman Glenn Madden Mark Gabert
SMEs:Steve Aubuchon Shelia Ward Amber Fowler Ivan Rounds
Catherine Mueller Sue Mullerleile Ted Boyle Patti Horobiowski Valerie Petty Gary Knight
Howard Grimsrud Karen Doran Scott Phipps Connie Gorman Amber Gifford Howard Grimsrud
Leslie Suprgeon Frank Binder Dan Gregovich Janine Seibel
Gas Compliance, Gas Programs, Gas Eng.Sheryl Florance Mike Littrel
Facilitator:Jody Morehouse & Kevin Farrington Genne Lehti Carrie Mourin
SMEs:Pam Luders Karen Cornwell Central Dispatch
Pam Horney Shawn Gallagher David Scalido Nancy Carroll Facilitator: Jody Morehouse
Sonia Johnson Virginia Omoto Vicki Vinson Larry Lee SMEs:
Jenny Bushnell Rob Cloward Raven Perry John Hanna Jeff Potter Mike McAllister
Kevin Farrington Linda Burger Shane Pacini Judy Olson Mike Littrel Reuben Arts
Jeff Webb David Smith Deb Denney Kelly Donohue
Steve Williams Mike Littrel Eric Rosentrater Maria Sullivan
Erika Jacobs Liz St. Mark PCB Testing and Tracking
David Howell Dan Wisdom Facilitator: Amber Gifford
Erika Jacobs Mike Faulkenberry DSM Residential & Low Income SMEs:
Gary Douglas Katy Cordrey Facilitator: DJ Kinservik Rodney Pickett Eric Meier
SMEs:Glen Madden Darrell Soyars
DSM Regulatory and Reporting Rachelle Humphrey Kathy Carpenter Liz St Mark Bryce Robbert
Facilitator: DJ Kinservik Kerry Shroy Kristine Meyer Ernie Lugan Mike Dahl
SMEs:Ann Carey Stacie Friend
Mark Baker Greta Zink Renee Coelho Chris Drake Distribution Transformers (METS)
Renesha Conley Roxanne Williams Facilitator: Amber Gifford
SMEs:
EMT (METS)Substation Inspections (METS)Rodney Pickett Eric Meier
Facilitator: Mike Magruder Facilitator: Mike Magruder Glen Madden Darrell Soyars
SMEs:SMEs:Liz St Mark Bryce Robbert
Rodney Pickett Eric Meier Rodney Pickett Eric Meier Ernie Lugan Mike Dahl
Glen Madden Darrell Soyars Glen Madden Darrell Soyars
Liz St Mark Bryce Robbert Liz St Mark Bryce Robbert Generation and Production
Ernie Lugan Mike Dahl Ernie Lugan Mike Dahl Facilitator: Bob Weisbeck
SMEs:
Commercial DSM/Account Management Marketing Andy Vickers Dean Hull
Facilitator: DJ Kinservik Facilitator: DJ Kinservik Jerry Cox Gregory Wiggins
SMEs:SMEs:Kelly Magalsky Debbie Biggs
Ann Carey Kerry Shroy Kelly Conley Scott Phipps Deb Mortlock Ryan Bean
Sue Baldwin Lorri Kirstein Mary Broemeling Tom Heavey Ken Sweigart Eric Atkinson
Catherine Bryan Kelly Conley Mary Tyrie Colette Bottinelli Ron Hargrave Glen Farmer
Camilee Martin Greta Zink Scott Steele Dana Anderson Tom Zimmerer Tammie Miller
Tom Leinhard Renee Coelho Randy Pierce Greg Lancaster
Meter Reading Andrea Marlowe Brian Vandenberg
DSM Oregon Facilitator: Janna Leaf Lin Miller Cody Krogh
Facilitator: DJ Kinservik SMEs:Steve Wenke Mike Gonnella
SMEs:Jackie Foss Alan Lackner John Hamill
Lisa McGarity Allyn Smith Karen Terpak Mary Jenson
Kerry Shroy Robin Hunter Adam Newhouse Jason Graham
Lorri Kirstein
Mark Porier
Mike Littrel
Tara Knox
Mollie Weis
Garth Brandon
Tamara Carter
Cherie Hirschberger
Aaron Henson
Attachment 10
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 51 of 51

CONFIDENTIAL

Scoring results of the assessments of vendor’s solution and services proposals,
per Attachment 8

Pages 1 through 62
Attachment 11
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 1 of 1

CONFIDENTIAL

Final solution evaluation workbook, per Attachment 8

Pages 1 through 15

Attachment 12
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 1 of 1

CONFIDENTIAL

Voting tallies for final vendor Selections

Pages 1 through 2

Attachment 13
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 1 of 1

CONFIDENTIAL

Price comparison of final solutions packages

Pages 1 of 1

Attachment 14
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 1 of 1

CONFIDENTIAL

Final capital budget approved for Project Compass.

Pages 1 of 1

Attachment 15
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 1 of 1

CONFIDENTIAL

Project update for Avista’s Board of Directors, February 2012.

Pages 1 through 13

Attachment 16
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 1 of 1

CONFIDENTIAL

Project update for Avista’s Board of Directors, September 2012

Pages 1 through 10

Attachment 17
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 1 of 1

CONFIDENTIAL

Project update for Avista’s Board of Directors, February 2013

Pages 1 through 11

Attachment 18
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 1, p. 1 of 1

Revised Timeline and Budget Forecast

Avista’s Project Compass

June 2014

Avista Utilities

Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05 & AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 2, p. 1 of 15
Project Compass Revised Timeline and Budget June 13, 2014 Page 2

Avista’s Project Compass
Revised Project Timeline and Budget Forecast

Q. Why is the Company revising its initial project plan?

A. Avista is in the latter stages of implementing its new Customer Service and Work
and Asset Management software systems, named “Project Compass” (or “Project” or
“System”). The Company is installing Oracle’s Customer Care & Billing system (or
“CC&B”), and IBM’s Maximo Work and Asset Management system (or “Maximo”). The
initial Project plan was completed in 2012 and envisioned a launch of the new System,
known as the “Go Live,” in Q3 2014. Through the course of implementation, the Project
team has developed much-more complete information about the full detail of the System
work requirements and its ultimate cost. This information, which is described below in
this report, provides the basis for the current revision of the initial plan. The overarching
consideration for revising the schedule is ensuring the new computer applications
undergo thorough testing to validate they will perform at a level, when launched, to
execute critical business functions properly and minimize the potential for disruptions to
our customers and the Company. The Compass management team determined a Q3 Go
Live would not provide sufficient time for the robust testing needed to ensure the
readiness of the new applications. Accordingly, the Company’s officers recently agreed
to extend the Go Live time frame to include Q1 2015.

Q. Did the Company’s plan and schedule, as initially developed, provide
adequate time for testing the System?

A. Yes. The initial work plan generally provided ample time for comprehensive
application testing. But, because there were longer than estimated delivery times required
by several implementation activities, the new System was not ready to commence testing
on the schedule originally envisioned.

Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05 & AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 2, p. 2 of 15
Project Compass Revised Timeline and Budget June 13, 2014 Page 3

Q. Specifically, what work processes took longer to complete?

A. The key activities that required additional time were the development of code for
“Extensions” to the CC&B application, and the currently-ongoing process of “Defect
Management” associated with application testing. Secondary activities that required
additional time, included “System Configuration,” writing “Test Cases” to support the
testing protocol, the processes of “Data Conversion” for both CC&B and Maximo, and
the development of “Integration Code” for the new replacement System and
interconnected applications and systems.

Q. Please briefly describe each of the work processes mentioned above?

A. System Configuration – “Configuring” an application is the process of setting
parameters in a vendor’s computer software that enables its built-in logic to
perform the functions required by the Company’s various work processes. The
process involves selecting among options, embedding algorithms, entering data,
and creating specialized instructions. Configuration is performed through a series
of input tables that organize the process of setting parameters. Each input table,
which could represent one particular type of customer service agreement, for
example, may have up to 100 individual, flexible, and configurable fields.
Configuring each field requires entering from one to several individual values,
instructions, or algorithms to establish the new base System. Each field in each
table is often cross-linked with content in dependent fields in complementary
tables, creating a complex of dependencies between many multiples of tables and
fields. This initial work requires the person entering the configuration settings on
a particular table to work iteratively and sequentially in configuring the dependent
fields in the other tables as one integrated work flow. As one example of the work
involved, it required one technician working full time over six months to
configure Avista’s existing rate tariffs into CC&B (142 different service
agreements across our three jurisdictions). Considering that CC&B has 1,686
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05 & AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 2, p. 3 of 15
Project Compass Revised Timeline and Budget June 13, 2014 Page 4

configuration tables, containing 12,158 configurable fields, the magnitude and
complexity of this task is quickly evident.

Extension Code – There is considerable flexibility to accommodate a range of
business processes within the application’s off-the-shelf Configuration settings.
But, many business steps are complex enough that they require programming of
specialized software code that is outside the application itself. The capability
enabled by this specialized code is referred to as an application “Extension.” The
process of developing this code, which is complex and labor intensive, begins
with a description of the work process steps that a particular extension will
perform (its technical requirements). Each set of requirements is then translated
into a technical specification that guides development of the actual programming
code. Once the technical staff has written the code, it is subjected to several
iterations of “Unit Testing.” Unit Testing validates that the unit of code, in
isolation from the System, properly performs the steps identified in the technical
specification.

Integration Code – “Integrations” refer to the connections between separate
computer applications that allow them to work in concert to perform allied
functions. An integration may involve exchanges of data, transmission of
instructions or changes in state, performance of computations and other
algorithms, and myriad other shared functions. Like Extensions, Integrations
require the development of specialized programming code that connects the
CC&B application with the Maximo application, and that connects them both
with the approximately 100 other applications and systems required to support the
Company’s customer service and business operations. Some of these systems
include the Avista customer website, the Company’s various internal systems
(such as financial applications, varied databases, supply chain, crew dispatch,
outage management reporting), systems of outside financial institutions used by
the Company and our customers, and the many vendors who support our delivery
of natural gas and electric service, such as bill printing and presentment. In
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05 & AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 2, p. 4 of 15
Project Compass Revised Timeline and Budget June 13, 2014 Page 5

addition to Integration connections between applications, this work also
encompasses the development of Avista’s “enterprise service bus.” The latter is
essentially an Integration network that is shared by the integrated applications.
The process of developing and Unit Testing the Integration code mirrors that of
the code for Extensions, described above.

Code Defect Management – The work of Configuration and coding Extensions
and Integrations is very complex and highly interrelated. As a consequence, it is
inherent that each unit of the completed work will require several iterations of
testing and modification before it will properly execute its part of a business
process. Portions of the configuration settings and the specialized code, which
initially do not perform properly, are known in the industry as “Defects.” Defects
are identified during testing when the configured application and specialized code
are run through a simulated business process referred to as a “Test Case.” During
the test, the program simulation runs to the point where a Defect is encountered
and the simulation is halted. In the work process known as “Defect Management,”
that Defect is located and analyzed, and is returned to the Configuration or coding
team for correction. The revised code is then run through the very same test-case
simulation until the next-limiting defect is encountered. This process is iteratively
repeated until all of the defects in that unit of code or Configuration, for that one
unique Test Case, have been located and repaired. Then, the testing process is
repeated for the next individual Test Case. Over a cycle of testing, it is typical for
the rate of defects to be relatively low, initially, and then to increase to a peak
before tapering back down to a low and predictable rate. This pattern is important
because during the initial testing it is impossible to predict the ultimate number or
complexity of Defects in a unit of code. Only at the point where the number of
Defects peaks and begins to decline in a predictable way can the remaining
Defect-Management effort be reliably forecast.

Application Testing – Three major areas of testing play a critical role in the
successful implementation of the new applications. Each type of testing is
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05 & AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 2, p. 5 of 15
Project Compass Revised Timeline and Budget June 13, 2014 Page 6

associated with its own unique process of code Defect Management. “System
Testing” commences when the work of Configuration and the coding of
Extensions is complete. Its purpose is to ensure the new applications perform
properly as they have been Configured and coded to support Avista’s business
processes. “Systems Integration Testing” occurs next in the sequence and
focuses on testing the specialized Integration code to ensure the new applications
perform properly with all of the other integrated applications and systems. This is
followed by “User Acceptance Testing,” which is performed by Avista
employees who will be using the new System to serve our customers. It has the
twin objectives of scrubbing the System to further identify and repair any critical
Configuration, Extension or Integration Defects, and to identify and implement
changes to the System that will make it more user friendly and function more
smoothly and efficiently for customers and employees.

Simulation Test Cases – Test-Case scenarios are written to evaluate virtually
every step of every business process that is enabled by the new System. Each Test
Case is unique from all other Test Cases and is written to evaluate a very specific
portion of the configured application or specialized code. The complexity of the
applications requires a significant number of unique Test Cases to fully validate
the integrity of the new System. The number of Test Cases written for each phase
of testing of the Company’s new applications, is presented below.

Application Testing Number of Test Cases
Avista Utilities’ Customer Web Portal 1,283
CC&B Credit and Collections System 667
CC&B Credit and Collections System Integration 407
CC&B System Test 1,472
CC&B System Integration Test 2,471
Maximo System Test 210
Maximo System Integration Test 454
Interactive Telephone System Test 351
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05 & AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 2, p. 6 of 15
Project Compass Revised Timeline and Budget June 13, 2014 Page 7

Total 7,315

Data Conversion – All of the Company’s existing data, whether customer account
information, energy-use history, electric and natural gas facilities data of all types,
mapping system information, and regulatory and compliance information, etc.,
must be transferred from existing computer hardware and data bases, such as the
Company’s current mainframe platform, to new data formats, databases, and
computer platforms connected to the new applications. To accomplish the
conversion, data in the existing databases is mapped according to where it will
eventually reside in the new databases. The data are then extracted from the old
databases, are transformed as necessary, and are loaded into the new databases.
The integrity of the loaded data is then validated for accuracy. Defects in data
conversion are identified in the process, Defects are repaired, and the data
load/validation exercise is repeated.

Q. Why are these work processes taking longer to complete than was initially
planned?”

A. The longer implementation times are primarily the result of the high degree of
complexity of the integrated systems being installed by the Company.

Q. What do you mean by “complexity of the integrated systems?”

A. While it’s common for a business to install one major system at a time, such as a
customer service, financial management, supply chain or asset management system, the
Company is installing two major systems simultaneously (CC&B and Maximo Asset
Management). Avista is required to implement both new applications because our legacy
System contains a customer service module and work and asset management module that
are highly integrated, mainframe based, and both in need of replacement. As described
above, this effort requires not only that these two systems be custom integrated, but that
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05 & AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 2, p. 7 of 15
Project Compass Revised Timeline and Budget June 13, 2014 Page 8

together, they be integrated with the approximately 100 other applications and systems
required to perform the Company’s integrated business operations.

In addition to the number of other applications and systems, Avista has several complex
applications that many utilities do not possess. Some of these include our Avista
Facilities Mapping system (“AFM”), which geographically displays every element of our
electric and natural gas facilities in a Geographic Information System (GIS) map format;
our Outage Management System, which integrates outage management computer logic
with the AFM system to provide accurate outage information for customers and
diagnostic tools that reduce outage restoration time and costs; and our Central Dispatch
System, which integrates AFM, the Outage Management System, and our Mobile
Workforce Management application, to optimize the dispatch and management of
restoration crews in real time across our entire electric and natural gas system.

The degree of complexity of the new System is also impacted by the diversity of service
provided by the utility. Because Avista provides both natural gas and electric service, the
complexity is substantially greater than that of a utility providing either one or the other.
Further, the Company provides service in three regulated jurisdictions, each of which has
separate and unique operating tariffs and rules that must be coded into the new
applications. For portions of our new System, Avista’s application configuration and
specialized coding will be roughly five times greater than that of a single-fuel utility
operating in one state.

Q. Did Avista take steps to understand the source of and to mitigate the impact
caused by the longer code development?

A. Yes it did. In December 2013, the Project Compass team assessed the relationship
between the complexity of Avista’s code requirements, the project schedule, and the level
of staffing applied to the work. The end result was that Avista’s integration contractor
retained additional resources to bolster its overseas code-development team. Progress on
the other activities that were taking additional time (application configuration, data
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05 & AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 2, p. 8 of 15
Project Compass Revised Timeline and Budget June 13, 2014 Page 9

conversion, integration code, and writing the test cases) was managed to ensure that
applicable portions were ready for System Testing once the CC&B Extension code was
available. Through this analysis and actions taken, the Company believed it could better
manage the overall time required for coding extensions.

Q. Why didn’t the Company change its forecast of the Go Live date earlier in
2014?

A. The Project Compass team concluded that even with an expected addition of time
for code completion, that it might be able to make up the time and maintain a Q3 Go
Live. The team specifically investigated the structure and schedule allotted for testing the
new System, as the primary tool for managing the overall Go Live schedule. The
Company wanted to test these ideas before making any formal decision to revise the
schedule.

Q. How did the team propose to change its testing protocol in an effort to
maintain its initial Go Live schedule?

A. As described above, the System Testing, System Integration Testing, and the
User Acceptance Testing, are typically performed in sequence. Each phase of testing,
including the process of Defect Management, is relatively complete before the next phase
is initiated. The Project Compass team revised this testing protocol to partially overlap
the phases of testing to be conducted. In this approach, completed “portions” of an
application are subjected to limited System Testing and then to limited System
Integration Testing with similarly-completed portions of the other application, including
the required Integrations. The net effect of this testing protocol, if successful, would be a
reduction in the overall calendar time allotted to application testing.

Q. What did the Project Compass Team learn from the overlapping testing
approach?

Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05 & AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 2, p. 9 of 15
Project Compass Revised Timeline and Budget June 13, 2014 Page 10

A. The Company implemented and evaluated this approach for System Testing and
concluded that it did reduce the time required for this test phase. But, because of the
emerging complexity and additional time required for code Defect Management, the
overlapping testing was not able to sufficiently reduce the time required for a successful
Go Live. Because overlapping testing adds complexity, and because code Defect
Management was becoming the more critical scheduling constraint, the team has made
limited use of the overlapping testing protocol for the System Integration and User
Acceptance Testing.

Q. What impact is Defect Management having on the overall Project schedule?

A. Avista has experienced greater complexity with the Project Compass Defects than
had been anticipated. The result is that even though some time was saved by overlapping
portions of the System Test, it has been offset by additional time being spent on Defect
Management. The result is the present revision of the overall Project timeline to include
Q1 2015.

Q. What steps has Avista taken to reduce the time being spent on code Defect
Management?

A. Avista has implemented actions in the areas of process cycle time and testing
protocol to improve the rate, or velocity, of Defect repair.

Process Cycle time – Avista worked with its system-integration contractors to reduce the
time required for defects in the code to be repaired by the development team and returned
to Avista for the next round of testing. Actions have included changing communication
protocols, assigning key development staff of the contractors to work from Avista’s
offices, and modifying schedules of the overseas development teams.

Testing Protocol – In a conventional testing protocol, as described above, the Test Case
scenario will be run until a limiting Defect is encountered. The testing is then stopped,
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05 & AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 2, p. 10 of 15
Project Compass Revised Timeline and Budget June 13, 2014 Page 11

the Defect is located and analyzed, and it’s returned to the development team for repair.
The Company is piloting a revised protocol where an identified Defect is patched with a
temporary workaround, and the Test Case is continued until the next-limiting Defect is
encountered. When possible, the second Defect is likewise patched, and testing is
continued until the point where a limiting Defect blocks any workaround and further
testing. Then, these accumulated Defects are analyzed and sent to the development team
for repair. The intent is that by aggregating several Defects at a time it will improve the
overall velocity of code Defect Management.

Q. What additional steps has the Company taken to help control the overall Go
Live schedule?

A. The company has implemented changes to the Data Conversion process for
CC&B and Maximo. These have helped accelerate Data Conversion and have improved
the efficiency of the data validation process. Additional project resources have been
added to various workstreams such as the Customer Web Integration effort. System-
integration contractors have arranged for their lead staff to spend additional direct time
with Avista’s team in Spokane, and Avista employs a fifty-hour work week, as needed, to
meet peak Project demands. The Project team has also increased the capability of the
computer systems supporting the application testing processes. This allows the iterative
Test Cases to be run more quickly, further accelerating the Defect Management process.
In addition, the Test Cases are being re-prioritized to help ensure the most important
business processes are tested and repaired first. The team has also launched the first wave
of training for its customer service employees who will be using the new CC&B
application. Finally, the Project managing directors are working to ensure morale of
employees and contractors remains at a high level for the intensive duration of the
Project.

Q. Has the revised implementation plan impacted the Project budget?

Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05 & AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 2, p. 11 of 15
Project Compass Revised Timeline and Budget June 13, 2014 Page 12

A. Yes. The longer time frame required to complete the work processes described
above are in large part responsible for the addition of approximately $18 million to the
estimated Project budget. This additional capital budget amount, forecast by cost
category, is presented in the table below.

Compass Major Costs $(1000’s)
System Integrators $3,163
Avista Labor / Loadings $4,661
Technology Contractors $3,201
AFUDC $3,609
Software Licenses $480
Common (PMO) $654
Hardware/Hosting $10
Oracle DB License -
Contingency $2,150
Total $17,927

The revised capital budget authorization for Project Compass is $100 million, which was
approved by the Company’s officers and Board of Directors on May 8, 2014.

Q. When you say “in part” do you mean there are other factors driving an
increase in the project budget beyond a later implementation?

A. Yes. There have been a number of additions to the Project that have contributed to
its overall cost, and that were not known at the time the Project plan and budget were
assembled in 2012. These changes to the implementation of the applications have been
tracked through a formalized process known as a “Project Change Request.” The sum of
these changes represents a total cost addition of $9.128 million.

Q. Can you provide some examples of the activities and costs that comprise
these Project Change Requests?

Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05 & AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 2, p. 12 of 15
Project Compass Revised Timeline and Budget June 13, 2014 Page 13

A. Yes. One of the larger cost items (approximately $1.8 million) is associated with
the Company’s AFM system. During implementation, the Compass team learned that a
GIS software update would provide for a more efficient transfer of data between the
AFM system and the new Maximo and CC&B applications. Another addition to the
Project was the development of a more-comprehensive customer communication plan
(approximately $1 million) to precede the Go Live of the new System. The plan includes
ad placement and a direct mailing that identifies subtle changes and improvements in
service, as well as the potentially-longer service times (such as call hold time and average
time per call) that are expected to temporarily coincide with the Go Live of the new
System. Another substantial addition to the capital cost of Project Compass was the
inclusion of software maintenance fees to cover the second year of implementation
(approximately $998,000). Most of the Project Change Requests have addressed the need
for additional technical resources to accomplish specific tasks during implementation of
the new systems. For a brief description of each of these Project Change Requests please
see Attachment A to this report.

Q. Didn’t the Company have a “contingency” in its initial budget to
accommodate such changes?

A. Yes. The $80 million initial capital authorization included a contingency amount
of $7.176 million. This contingency has offset the majority of the costs added through
Project Change Requests.

Q. Has the Company established a definitive date for the Go Live?

A. Not at this point. While the Project Compass team believes that a Go Live
window that includes Q1 2015 will provide sufficient time for an effective
implementation of the Project, it must complete the bulk of the testing and Defect
Management processes before it has confidence in setting a definitive date. When the Go
Live date has been selected it will be shared with customers through the communication
plan.
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05 & AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 2, p. 13 of 15
Project Compass Revised Timeline and Budget June 13, 2014 Page 14

Q. Does the Company believe the Project Compass Costs, including the budget
additions, are reasonable and prudent?

A. Yes. The original timeline and budget were important project management tools
that, while much more refined than the earliest estimates, were still associated with some
degree of uncertainty. As described above, when the initial estimates of time and
resources required for coding the extensions were developed, the team had no way of
knowing the precise degrees of complexity of the coding, the resources required to meet a
specified timeline, or the degree of complexity of the defect management process. If the
Project team had that precise foreknowledge, it may have added resources and budget to
the Project to achieve the initial Go Live date, or it may have added budget to the
initially-planned resources to achieve a later date. Because the Project is costing more to
implement than was initially estimated, doesn’t mean it is no longer the least-cost
solution for our customers. Avista believes its revised implementation plan and budget
simply reflects a more accurate assessment of the true cost of implementing the Project.

Q. How does the Company believe the implementation of large IT projects
should be evaluated?

A. First, Avista is not aware of any large enterprise application system that has been
installed by a peer utility that explicitly achieved its initial estimates of timeline and
budget. That said, there are distinguishing factors in every project that are useful in
helping to assess the reasonableness of its costs. In extreme cases, some companies have
abandoned the applications during the course of implementation; the new systems are
never placed in service. These failures are often followed by an entirely new selection
and implementation effort. In less dire cases, the company may learn during the course of
implementation that it selected a less than optimum solution set, which requires a
significant and expensive workaround to successfully install. In some cases, the scope of
functionality has been set either too broad or too restrictive. In either case, the costs and
the time delay associated with mitigating those initial choices can be very substantial. In
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05 & AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 2, p. 14 of 15
Project Compass Revised Timeline and Budget June 13, 2014 Page 15

other cases, companies have made implementation errors such as overlooking basic
required functionality, resulting in additional time and budget to include while the
majority of the project is awaiting the Go Live. In the best cases, companies have simply
underestimated, to varying degrees, the true cost of implementing the selected
applications. In other words, these companies have completed a comprehensive needs
assessment, prepared a balanced project scope, conducted a robust selection process,
selected the proper solutions, hired capable implementation contractors, adequately
prepared their organizations for the many changes associated with implementing the new
systems, including timely and effective training, prepared their customers for any
changes associated with the new systems, and achieved a reasonable balance in the
timing of completion of implementation activities. Although these companies took longer
to Go Live and spent more money than initially planned, they successfully avoided the
major pitfalls that have rendered so many of these projects less than fully successful.
Avista counts its Project Compass in this latter class of successful projects, and is
confident in the successful completion of the Project.

Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05 & AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 2, p. 15 of 15
COMMUNICATION
Debbie Simock/Peggy Blowers
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05 & AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 3, p. 1 of 9
Project Compass Communication Planning
CC&B Project Team
External
Communication
Plan
Focus Group
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05 & AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 3, p. 2 of 9
<-2013 – November 2014 December 2014 January 2015 February 2015 March 2015->
Project Compass External Communications
Bill Insert Customer Direct
Mail
Contingency
Planning:

•Media
•Ads
•Radio
•Kiosks
•Social Media
•Connections
Connections Connections
Video – How to Read Your New Bill
EVP/IVR
Targeted
Communications –
Master Accounts
Targeted Communications – Area
Lights/Street Lights, Landlords,
CLB/Wind, Prior Obligation, APS
Postcards
eBlast/Questline
Social Media
Web Page
We are here

2/2/15
Go-Live

Community Newsletter

Communications
Prep

Industry
Publications (WEI,
Intelligent Utility)
Media
Communications:
Spokesman Review
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05 & AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 3, p. 3 of 9
Informing our Customers

Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05 & AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 3, p. 4 of 9
Informing our Customers
avistautilities.com

Home page banner
Web ad
New landing page –
Changes to serve you
better
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05 & AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 3, p. 5 of 9
Customer Direct Mail – January 2015
Key messages:
Account Number Change
New bill
Website availability during cutover
FAQs
In specially-marked envelope

Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05 & AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 3, p. 6 of 9
February Bill Insert

Key Messages

Account number change
New bill
We’re here to help

How to read your bill
Promotes video
Specially-marked bill
envelopes in
February and March
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05 & AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 3, p. 7 of 9
Customer Segmentation
In Process:
Automatic Payment Service
Landlords
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05 & AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 3, p. 8 of 9
<-2013 – November 2014 December 2014 January 2015 February 2015 March 2015->
Project Compass Internal Employee Communications

2/2/15
Go-Live

We are here
Business Department Communication Meetings
eView Articles
Lunch & Learns
Monthly Postcards
Executive Steering Committee Meetings
Project Team Meetings
Director Meetings
Talking Points - CSR, AE
(Connections)
Talking Points – CSR,
AE, RBM
(Connections,
Customer Direct
Mail)
Talking Points –
CSR, AE, RBM
(Bill Insert, Go
Live)
Talking Points –
CSR, AE, RBM
(Go Live)
eView Extra
AVAnet Home
Page/ Share point
Leadership
Message

As Needed

Cartoons
End User
Message
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05 & AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 3, p. 9 of 9

Updated 12-9-14
Peggy Blowers, Debbie Simoc
31 7 14 21 28 5 12 19 26 2 9 16 23 30 7 14 21 28 4 11 18 25 1 8 15 22 29 6 13 20 27 3 10 17 24 1 8 15 22 29 5 12 19 26 2 9 16 23 2 9 16 23 30 6 13 20 27 30

CONNECTIONS NEWSLETTER
C&I COMMUNICATION BILL INSERT OR DIRECT MAIL
PR/NEWS STORIES (Tentative)
DIRECT MAIL-RESIDENTIAL& C&I w SPECIAL ENVELOPE
BILL INSERTS
CHANGE MESSAGE PRINTED ON
SPECIAL BILL MAILING ENVELOPE
BILL MESSAGE CENTER
SOCIAL MEDIA
EBLAST (May be Direct Mail)
QUESTLINE
-
Project Compass Communication Timeline
Targeted message for residential and C&I
September OctoberApril May June July August
Change is here: New bill and account number; Benefits of new CC&B.
Post-launch issues management (if necessary)

DRAFT
Color Key - gray is development and review timeline; colors indicate the time period communications wil be occurring.
nchor Communication piece (specific to e-bill customers)
2nd Q 2014 3rd Q 2014 4th Q 2014
November December April
1st Q 2015
March
Information Guide Release
Feb. insert production timeline
Mar. insert production timeline
GO

L
I
V
E
February January
Announce & Inform Instruct & Re-enforce
3rd Party Notification (TBD)
Collection Agencies
Wind Power
Targeted Cusomter Segment Communications
Area/Street Lights
PS - Postcard
Landlords
Prior Ob (TBD)
C&I
WEBPAGE and VIDEO
Reminder of blackout
EVP/IVR
GO-LIVE EMPLOYEE COMMUNICATIONS
eViewInterim message to employees
Executive Steering Committee AnnouncementProject Team Announcement
Leadership AnnouncementAll employee announcement
eView ExtraWeclome to Maximo
Welcome to CC&BAVAnet Home Page Announcement
Web updateAny needed talking points to CSR's
POST GO-LIVE EMPLOYEE COMMUNICATIONS
Web content goes live: How to read your bill; Direct mail piece; FAQ; video
On-hold message: Change is coming
On-hold message: Information about the conversion taking place over the weekend and the website being down
On-hold message: Information about new bill and new account number reminders
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05 & AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 4, p. 1 of 2

Updated 5 -29-2014

CONNECTIONS NEWSLETTER
C&I COMMUNICATION BILL INSERT OR DIRECT MAIL
PR/NEWS STORIES
DIRECT MAIL-RESIDENTIAL&
C&I w SPECIAL ENVELOPE
BILL INSERTS
CHANGE MESSAGE PRINTED ON
SPECIAL BILL MAILING ENVELOPE
BILL MESSAGE CENTER
BLOG AND SOCIAL MEDIA
Pro ec ompass us omer ommun ca ons me ne
DRAFT
2nd 201 3rd 201 4th 201prilMaJunJulugus Decembe
LI
V
E
Color Key - gray is development and
review timeline; colors indicate the time
Septembe Octobe Novembe
Announce Instruct &
Information Guide Release
Change is here: New bill and account number;
Post-launch issues management (if necessary)
Setting
Oct. insert production timeline
Nov. insert production timeline
Targeted message for residential and C&I
EBLAST
QUESTLINE
C&I BUSINESS ONE-SHEET
WEBPAGE and VIDEO
Reminder of blackout
EVP
On-hold message: Information about the conversion taking place over the weekend and the website being down
On-hold message: Information about new bill and new account number reminders
-
customers)
Web content goes live: How to read your bill; Direct mail piece; FAQ; video
On-hold message: Change is coming
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05 & AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 4, p. 2 of 2
Important information
about changes
coming to your Avista
account and bill
Copyright 2014 Avista Corporation
Quick facts you need to know:
u Your account number will change. All customers will
receive a new 10-digit account number. Refer to your February
bill for your new account number.
u You may need to take action. Your new account number
will be on your first redesigned energy bill. You will need to
use your new account number on any correspondence with
Avista, including writing your new account number on your
payment. If you pay your monthly Avista bill through
your bank or other third party, you will need to update
your account number with your financial institution or
payment service.
u Your monthly bill will be new and improved. The
updated monthly bill will be easier to read and make it easier
to find your bill amount and payment due date, and it will
have more information to help you manage your energy
use.
u Some areas of our avistautilities.com website will be
down during conversion. Conversion to the new customer
information and billing system is planned for Thursday,
January 29, at 8 p.m., until Monday, February 2, at 7 a.m.
During this time, access to your My Account information
and self-service options at avistautilities.com and on our
automated phone system will not be available. However, our
customer service team will be available to help you.
We’re making
changes to serve
you better.
Avista is launching our new customer information and billing
system in February. We are excited about the new system
and the increased efficiencies it provides, along with new
opportunities to build on the excellent customer service
that you expect. This system is the core of our day-to-
day operations and touches each of our more than 650,000
electric and natural gas customers – residential, commercial
and industrial - in Washington, Idaho and Oregon.
We’re working hard to make the transition as seamless as
possible for you. To make sure you know what to expect and
what you may need to do, please take a few minutes to read
the following information. More information will be available
in your first new bill and online at avistautilities.com.
We are here to make the transition to our new customer
information and billing system as easy as possible
for you. If you have questions, visit our website at
avistautilities.com or call our customer service center at
[phone]. We’re available 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. Monday
through Friday and Saturday 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.
New account number
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05 & AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 5, p. 1 of 2
Frequently Asked Questions
We’re making upgrades to serve you
better – what you need to know
u Why is my account number changing? The updated
system requires a 10-digit account number rather than
a nine-digit account number that is currently used.
Changing account numbers can be a little inconvenient
initially, but we’re sure our updated customer information
and billing system will provide new opportunities to build
on the excellent customer service that you expect when
you contact Avista.
u How do I find my new account number? Your new
account number will be in the top center of your first bill
following the conversion, which should be your February
bill. You’ll be reminded about your new account number
with a message on the bill and on the outer envelope of
your bill.
u Do I need to use my new account number to pay my
bill? Yes. To make sure your payment is correctly applied
to your account, please start using your new account
number as soon as possible after receiving it on your
first new bill and make sure to write it on your check or
money order.
u What if I pay my bill by…..
• Check or money order by mail – Simply write your
new account number in the memo field of your check or
on a money order and place it, along with the payment
stub, in the return envelope included with your bill.
• Online payment by bank – If you have an online
payment account set up, please update your account
number with your bank or other third party as soon
as possible after receiving your first updated bill. Your
new account number will be on the bill.
• Payment service – You do not need to take any
action if you have Avista make automatic payment
withdrawals from your checking or savings account
each month or if you have a payment profile set up
through Avista’s My Account.
• One-time electronic payment – You can continue to
make a one-time payment with a credit or debit card or
from your checking or savings account. Just make sure
to enter your new 10-digit account number.
u Why is the bill changing? The updated bill will be easier
to read and make it easier to find information on your bill
amount and payment due date, and will have an expanded
message center with helpful information. Your first bill after
the conversion will include an insert with more information
on how to read the updated bill. You can also visit our
website at avistautilities.com for a video to help you become
familiar with the new bill.
u How will I know when the change to the new system
has taken place? Watch for a specially-marked Avista
envelope in the mail that will include your first updated
bill following the change to our new system. If you’re an eBill
customer, look for a message on the email notifying you
that your bill is available for viewing. The transition is planned
for Thursday, January 29, at 8 p.m., until Monday, February
2, at 7 a.m.
u What if I still have questions? We are here to help make
the transition to our new customer information system and
new bill as easy as possible for you. If you have questions,
visit our website at avistautilities.com or call our customer
service center at [phone]. Call volumes may be
higher in the early days after conversion, so we appreciate
your patience and understanding.
New account number
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05 & AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 5, p. 2 of 2
Learning Opportunities
Almost two months after successfully implementing new customer information
and enterprise asset management systems, Avista looked back at the nearly
four-year process to evaluate key learnings. Here’s what we discovered:
• Leadership is key – establish active, executive sponsorship and develop a clear
program management structure with roles and responsibilities understood.
• Benchmark with experienced vendors and others
to help establish an initial budget.
• Closely manage the change-request process.
• Treat your System Integrator as part of your team and
establish the on-site schedule early in the project.
• Establish a dedicated full-time core team, determine the best way to provide
ongoing recognition for the team, and then do it. Food, food and more food
is always good.
• Focus on the true requirements and keep them simple. Understand
the long-term implications of how the requirements will be used.
• Robust quality assurance and test methodology are
critical to the success of the project.
• Strategically plan for change – don’t let change just happen. Manage it!
• Have a dedicated Organizational Change Management
resource at the beginning and throughout the project.
• Invest in training – it is critical for success, with the more training, the better.
• Engage a training vendor who understands the software
and provides a known quality product.
• Do not overlook CC&B training for non-customer-service employees
or Maximo training for non-operational employees who use the
software as reference or for information purposes only.
• Naming the work Project Compass and creating a visual identity created
a team environment and fostered company-wide awareness.
Partnerships drive success
for Avista technology
implementations.
Replacing a 20-year-old homegrown customer information system, adding a new
enterprise asset management system, and launching a redesigned monthly energy
statement for customers are not often tackled simultaneously. But we took on the
challenge with primary partners Oracle, IBM, Mosaic, EY, Black and Veatch, and TMG
Consulting (formerly Five Point Consulting).
After a nearly four-year journey on what we call Project Compass, Avista successfully
implemented Oracle Customer Care and Billing (CC&B) and IBM Asset Management
(Maximo) with support from our partners. These new systems will carry Avista into the
future while increasing our operating efficiencies and providing new opportunities to
build on the excellent service our customers expect.
Here’s how we did it.
About Avista
Avista Utilities, headquartered in
Spokane, Washington, is involved
in the production, transmission and
distribution of energy. We provide
energy services and electricity to
370,000 customers and natural gas
to 330,000 customers in a service
territory that covers 30,000 square
miles in eastern Washington, northern
Idaho and parts of southern and
eastern Oregon, with a population
of 1.6 million. Avista Utilities is an
operating division of Avista Corp.
(NYSE: AVA). For more information,
please visit avistautilities.com.
Contact
For more information, contact
Debbie Simock
Avista
External Communications
509.495.8031
[e-mail]
Go-Live, February 1, 2015.
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 6, p. 1 of 2
Taking the Right Approach
To ensure that Avista successfully implemented the right
technology for our business, it was important to start with a
firm foundation. That included:
• understanding what worked well and not so well for others
• partnering with TMG Consulting to select the right systems
for our business needs
• establishing an organizational structure lead by a steering
committee of Avista officers with co-executive sponsors
embedded in the project team
• incorporating Organizational Change Management (OCM)
into all aspects of the project
• selecting an overall program manager external to Avista
• having several employees from the business units on the
project full time, sharing their knowledge while learning the
new systems. This approach provided expertise during the
project, as well as at go-live.
A unique element of developing a team identity for those
implementing CC&B and Maximo was having an Avista-wide
employee contest to name the project. The result – Project
Compass. This fostered company-wide awareness for the work
that would have an enterprise-wide impact.
Fostering Relationships
Important to the success of Project Compass was establishing
a strong Project Management Office (PMO) team, including
Avista’s co-executive sponsors and OCM, plus project managers
from IBM, Oracle, EY, and Black and Veatch. Benefits included:
• more direct communications between all parties
• full integration of vendors into the Project Compass team
• providing an off-site location for the PMO team, Avista
employees and all contractors working on Project Compass
• minimized day-to-day interruptions
Tracking Success
CC&B Maximo
Date Work Orders Service Requested
2015 Created Complete Created Complete
February 6,851 6,104 9,592 10,260
Mar 2-6 3,225 2,459 1,919 3,542
Training
CC&B Employees Trained Training Hours
Customer Service
Representatives, billing, back office 180+25,600+
Non-Customer Service
Real estate, distribution dispatch, credit service dispatch, demandside
management, rates, meter shop, remittance, construction
229 220
Maximo Employees Trained Training Hours
Customer project coordinators, construction technicians,
dispatchers, engineers at 15 training locations,
accommodating 25 outside offices
380+8,400
Voice of the Customer
Customer Satisfaction in percentage
Date Month Year to Date
February 2015 95 97
February 2014 95 93
“Invest in Organizational
Change Management. This is
perhaps the most important
piece of the project.”
Pat Dever, Director of Application and
System Programming
“Address issues head on,
be proactive to exchange
information at all levels of
the project, and don’t forget
to celebrate the smallest
of successes.”
Vicki Weber, Director of Energy
Delivery Technology.
Training for Success
Preparing employees to use CC&B and Maximo on day one was an
important goal for successful implementation. Achieving
that included:
• partnering with Mosaic for a training program of web-based
courses, classroom training, self-directed system practice and
planned activities
• using a train-the-trainer approach to create super-users when
trainers returned to their normal work groups
after go-live
Defining Success
Avista’s measure of success on day one was continued delivery of
exceptional customer service with fully integrated systems, mailing
accurate redesigned customer energy bills, and having employees
who could successfully conduct transactions in both CC&B and
Maximo. These implementations were successful, exceeding Avista’s
expectations and maintaining grade of service targets. This was
a huge accomplishment, considering the 100 integration points
between CC&B, Maximo and other critical systems.
We are proud of our employees and partners who all contributed to
Avista’s success in reaching our implementation goal with minimal
impact to the business.
+7.5
-6.5
-17.8
-4.5
-15.6
489
466 457 459
430
87
79
Go-Live Manager
service level
Grade-of-service targets were
maintained during Go-Live.
Exhibit No. 10
Case Nos. AVU-E-15-05/AVU-G-15-01 J. Kensok, Avista
Schedule 6, p. 2 of 2