BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF OREGON UM-1081

Similar documents
BEFORE THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF UTAH ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER. Direct Testimony of Michael G. Wilding

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF OREGON UM 1081 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) INTRODUCTION. Pursuant to OAR and , the Industrial

Competitive Power Market for Oregon Nonresidential Customers

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF OREGON UM 1910

Resume of. Marc M. Hellman, PhD

Oregon John A. Kitzhaber, MD, Governor

BEFORE THE OREGON PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION UE 250 & UE 251 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) OPENING TESTIMONY OF MICHAEL C.

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF OREGON DR filed by PacifiCorp d/b/a Pacific Power (PacifiCorp) and by Noble Americas Energy Solutions

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF OREGON

RE: UM Portland General Electric Supplemental Green Tariff Filing

PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF OREGON UM 1355 STAFF REPLY TESTIMONY OF. Kelcey Brown

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF OREGON

PacifiCorp d/b/a Pacific Power encloses for filing in this docket the following documents:

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF OREGON ) ) ) ) ) UE 335 INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF OREGON UM 1610 UPDATES ADOPTED; OFFICIAL NOTICE TAKEN; PHASE II OPENED I. INTRODUCTION

Global Credit Research New Issue 15 MAY New Issue: Chelan County Public Util. Dist 1, WA

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF OREGON

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF OREGON UM 1633 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) TESTIMONY OF RALPH SMITH ON BEHALF OF THE NORTHWEST INDUSTRIAL GAS USERS AND

November 5, Re: Tariff Advice No Revisions to Schedule 98, Residential and Small Farm Energy Credit

October Snohomish County Public Utility District

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

BEFORE THE NEW MEXICO PUBLIC REGULATION COMMISSION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) DIRECT TESTIMONY RUTH M. SAKYA.

November 6, Background on Proposed Principles for Power Sale to Alcoa

BEFORE THE PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION. PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION v. PECO ENERGY COMPANY ELECTRIC DIVISION

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF OREGON UM 1953 I. INTRODUCTION

BEFORE THE WYOMING PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER. Direct Testimony of Cindy A. Crane

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF OREGON UM 1209 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) DISPOSITION: PROPOSED BUDGETS FOR ISSUE FUND GRANTS APPROVED IN PART

McDowell Rackner & Gibson PC

BEFORE THE NEW MEXICO PUBLIC REGULATION COMMISSION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) DIRECT TESTIMONY RUTH M. SAKYA. on behalf of.

Privatization of Bonneville Power Administration s Transmission Assets

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION. Public Service Company of Colorado ) Docket No.

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF OREGON

September 13, Transition Adjustment, Five-Year Cost of Service Opt-Out Docket No. UE 267

Rocky Mountain Power Exhibit RMP (JRS-1S) Docket No ER-15 Witness: Joelle R. Steward BEFORE THE WYOMING PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

Northwest Power and Conservation Council 851 SW 6 th Ave, Suite 1100 Portland, OR 97204

BEFORE THE NEW MEXICO PUBLIC REGULATION COMMISSION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) DIRECT TESTIMONY RUTH M. SAKYA.

APPENDIX B: WHOLESALE AND RETAIL PRICE FORECAST

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF OREGON UM 1729(1) DISPOSITION: STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION ADOPTED AS REVISED

Residential Line and Service Extension Allowance Testimony. Application No.: Witnesses: C. Silsbee S. Reed J. Schichtl L. Vellanoweth (U 338-E)

RR1 - Page 181 of 518

I. INTRODUCTION. A. My name is Barry F. Blackwell and my business address is 1000 East Main Street, Q. BY WHOM ARE YOU EMPLOYED AND IN WHAT CAPACITY?

ATTACHMENT 3. Testimony of Eric H. Chung

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF OREGON UM 1147 (PHASE III) Portland General Electric Company ("PGE") appreciates the opportunity to

Rocky Mountain Power Exhibit RMP (BNW-7) Docket No Witness: Bruce N. Williams BEFORE THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF UTAH

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF OREGON ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Preliminary Staff Analysis:

DRAFT REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS BY THE ARIZONA POWER AUTHORITY FOR SCHEDULING SERVICES AND/OR USE OF HOOVER DAM DYNAMIC SIGNAL.

Rocky Mountain Power Docket No Witness: Nikki L. Kobliha BEFORE THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF UTAH ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF OREGON. UM 1147 (Phase III)

BEFORE THE WYOMING PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER. Supplemental Direct Testimony of Joelle R. Steward

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF OREGON

Attachment 3 - PECO Statement No. 2 Direct Testimony and Exhibits of Alan B. Cohn

Rocky Mountain Power Docket No Witness: Nikki L. Kobliha BEFORE THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF UTAH ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER

Testimony of Stephen E. Pickett

EMERALD PEOPLE S UTILITY DISTRICT

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION ) ) ) ) ) ) DIRECT TESTIMONY REGINA L. BUTLER DIRECTOR ELECTRIC UTILITIES SECTION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY BEFORE THE BONNEVILLE POWER ADMINISTRATION

April 24, In the Matter of the Revised Rate Schedules filed by PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY OPUC Docket No. UE

UTAH MUNICIPAL POWER AGENCY ANNUAL REPORT LEVAN MANTI NEPHI PROVO SALEM SPANISH FORK

All Source Request for Proposal Bid Conference. October 22, 2008

BEFORE THE PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION

Rocky Mountain Power Docket No Witness: Douglas K. Stuver BEFORE THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF UTAH ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER

BPA s Case for Conservation. Richard Génecé Vice President, Energy Efficiency

BEFORE THE PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION. PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION v. PECO ENERGY COMPANY ELECTRIC DIVISION

Oregon Public Utility Commission Staff April 29, Table of Contents. Inc-ing load 3 Arbitrage 4 Congestion payment strategies 6

SDG&E REBUTTAL TESTIMONY OF CYNTHIA S. FANG (ELECTRIC RATES AND BILL COMPARISON) JUNE 18, 2018

Portland General Electric Company Annual Report

PACIFIC POWER A DIVISION OF PACIFICORP

BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION ) ) ) ) CASE NO. PAC-E APPLICATION FOR CHANGE TO DEPRECIATION RATES APPLICABLE TO ELECTRIC PROPERTY

BEFORE THE PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY DOCKET NO. R Direct Testimony of Jeffrey L.

CASE NO.: ER Surrebuttal Testimony of Bruce E. Biewald. On Behalf of Sierra Club

MEMORANDUM. July 29, Power Committee. Massoud Jourabchi. SUBJECT: Financial Assumptions for the Seventh Power Plan

Pacific Northwest Generating Cooperative, Inc. (d.b.a. PNGC Power)

Energy Northwest, WA

ELECTRIC SCHEDULE E-SDL Sheet 1 SPLIT-WHEELING DEPARTING LOAD

RR16 - Page 1 of

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF OREGON UM 1610 DISPOSITION: STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION ADOPTED IN PART

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) UPDATED DIRECT TESTIMONY OF S. NASIM AHMED SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY

BEFORE THE PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION PECO ENERGY COMPANY ELECTRIC DIVISION

PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC CO / OR/

BEFORE THE FLORIDA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION DOCKET NO EI

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF OREGON UM 1422(1)

BEFORE THE WYOMING PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER. Rebuttal Testimony of Joelle R. Steward

Oregon John A. Kitzhaber, MD, Governor

UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C FORM 10-Q

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF OREGON UM This order memorializes our decision, made and effective at our September 27, 2016 Regular

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF OREGON UE 335 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Opening Testimony of George M. Waidelich.

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION ) ) ) ) SURREBUTTAL TESTIMONY ELANA FOLEY SENIOR RATE CASE ANALYST

GILLARD, BAUER, MAZRUM, FLORIP, SMIGELSKI & GULDEN ATTORNEYS AT LAW 109 E. CHISHOLM STREET ALPENA, MICHIGAN May 12, 2015

Earnings Conference Call. 3 rd Quarter 2018 November 1, 2018

2015 General Rate Case

PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT # 1 of Jefferson County 230 Chimacum Road Port Hadlock, WA July 16, 2008 SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES

BEFORE THE PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION PECO ENERGY COMPANY ELECTRIC DIVISION

OREGON STANDARD AVOIDED COST RATES AVOIDED COST PURCHASES FROM ELIGIBLE QUALIFYING FACILITIES Page 1

REBUTTAL TESTIMONY OF THE OFFICE OF PEOPLE S COUNSEL STATE OF MARYLAND BEFORE THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

Las Cruces School District 2, NM

INTERCONNECTION FACILITIES STUDY AGREEMENT

AMENDMENTS TO ISO OPERATING AGREEMENTS TO COMPLY WITH COMMISSION S DECEMBER 17, 1997 ORDER 1

Transmission Formula Rate 2017 Annual Update. June 23, 2017

UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C FORM 10-Q

Transcription:

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF OREGON UM-1081 In the Matter on an Investigation into Direct Access Issues for Industrial and Commercial Customers under SB 1149 Direct Testimony of Lorne Whittles on behalf of EPCOR Merchant and Capital (US) Inc. May 27, 2004

Q: Please state your name, business address and present position with EPCOR Merchant and Capital (US) Inc. ( EMC ). A. My name is Lorne J.R. Whittles. My business address is Suite 250, 1161 W. River Street, Boise, ID, 83702. My present position with EMC is Manager, Pacific Northwest Energy Marketing. Q: Briefly describe your education and professional background. A: I hold a Master of Business Administration (MBA) degree from the University of Calgary as well as a Bachelor of Science (BSc.) degree from the University of Lethbridge. I have worked with EMC since April 2002, and I am responsible for the development and support of EMC s wholesale and retail presence in the Pacific Northwest region. This includes the support of EPCOR s generation assets and transmission portfolio in the region. Moreover, I have been actively involved for more than two years on various regulatory initiatives and issues, working to remove barriers for large commercial and industrial customers seeking Direct Access in the Oregon market, as enabled by SB 1149. Page 1

Q: Why is EMC interested in issuing testimony on the subject of PacifiCorp s Transition Adjustment calculation? A: EMC is certified by the Oregon Public Utilities Commission as a Scheduling ESS. Additionally, EMC is also certified by Portland General Electric ( PGE ) as a Scheduling ESS, and currently serves industrial load under Direct Access in PGE s service territory. EMC has a strong interest in serving customers situated in PacifiCorp s service territory under Direct Access. To date, however, given the uneconomic nature of Direct Access resulting from PacifiCorp s current Transition Adjustment calculations (among other concerns relating to the structure of PacifiCorp s Direct Access program), EMC has not initiated the certification process in PacifiCorp s service territory. Accordingly it is EMC s hope to promote improvements in the structure of Direct Access in PacifiCorp s territory so as to facilitate customer participation at a level greater than zero. Q: What is the purpose of your testimony? A: The purpose of my testimony is to assess PacifiCorp s current approach to calculating its Transition Adjustment and its effect in rendering Direct Access uneconomic for PacifiCorp s large industrial customers. Page 2

Q: Why do you say that Direct Access is uneconomic? A: The manner in which PacifiCorp calculates the Transition Adjustment either undervalues the credit or, as applicable, overvalues the charge - that a customer who elects to take service from an ESS under Direct Access would receive or pay. The result is that the Direct Access customer must pay a premium relative to PacifiCorp s cost of service rate - to receive service under Direct Access. Q: Exactly how is the value of the Transition Adjustment diminished? A: PacifiCorp s current Transition Adjustment calculation is predicated on the sale of freed up energy. PacifiCorp bases its adjustment on the concept that energy is freed up by a PacifiCorp customer who elects to take service from an ESS under Direct Access, and that this energy is then resold by PacifiCorp at a market hub. This approach is reflected in the current Transition Adjustment calculation, resulting in PacifiCorp charges: (a) to wheel the freed up power through its system to move it to PacifiCorp s boundary (per the cost of the FERC Regulated PacifiCorp Transmission Wheel and Losses); and (b) for a Bonneville Power Administration ( BPA ) wheel and the associated losses to move the freed up power from PacifiCorp s boundary to the market hub. The current calculation generates a credit for the avoided cost of State Regulated PacifiCorp Transmission Wheel and Losses, so some offset occurs for the first charge denoted as (a) above. However, with respect to the second charge, the BPA Page 3

Wheel and Losses denoted as (b) above, a Direct Access customer would effectively pay these charges a second time when they purchase and pay for power from an ESS. This second charge largely represents the premium that a customer would incur on Direct Access. Q: Is this reduction in the value of the Transition Adjustment noted by PacifiCorp in its testimony? A: Yes. PacifiCorp witness John Apperson recognizes that parity, relative to PacifiCorp s cost of service rate, is not achieved because PacifiCorp bases its Transition Adjustment on the market hub price minus the BPA Wheel, to reflect the concept that freed up energy is sold at the market hub, generating proceeds net of the BPA wheel and losses. In this manner, Mr. Apperson claims that this approach is cost neutral to other customers. Q: Is there another approach that does not disadvantage Direct Access customers yet is cost neutral to other customers? A: Yes. Rather than base the Transition Adjustment calculation on the premise that PacifiCorp is selling energy freed up by a Direct Access customer, the calculation should be based on the concept that PacifiCorp is avoiding purchases. Page 4

Q: Why would this be appropriate? A: In its Integrated Resource Plan ( IRP ), PacifiCorp has identified the need for additional power in the western side of their system, indicating a resource-load gap in the short-term, starting in 2004. These short-term needs could be filled if customers are permitted to choose Direct Access, thus allowing PacifiCorp to avoid market purchases to fill the resource gap. In this manner, as energy is not being redirected to a market hub for remarketing (but rather, being redistributed to other PacifiCorp customers), the PacifiCorp Transition Adjustment calculation would no longer need to encompass charges for either the wheel across PacifiCorp s territory, or for the BPA wheel and losses to move power from PacifiCorp s boundary to the market hub. Moreover, by avoiding purchases of power at the market hub to meet its load-resource deficit, PacifiCorp would avoid both the price of power at the market hub - and the cost of the BPA wheel and losses required to move it to PacifiCorp s service territory. Q: What is the impact of this? A: The resultant Transition Adjustment calculation would reflect the avoided cost of power at the hub plus the avoided cost of the BPA wheel, in contrast to the current approach which reflects a sale of power at the hub minus the cost of the BPA wheel. Accordingly, the premium that is characteristic of the current Transition Adjustment calculation is largely neutralized, as shown in the example Page 5

appearing in Exhibit A. Note that Exhibit A isolates only those elements of the Transition Adjustment calculation that are addressed in this testimony, specifically the BPA wheel and associated losses, and is not intended to represent the calculation in its entirety. Q: Please summarize your testimony. A: I have shown that PacifiCorp s current method of calculating the Transition Adjustment renders Direct Access uneconomic. I propose adopting an avoided purchase approach to calculating PacifiCorp s Transition Adjustment. Q: Does this conclude your testimony? A: Yes. Page 6

EXHIBIT A All values are expressed in $/MWh Assumptions: 1. Forward price of power at market hub is $43.00 2. PacifiCorp regulated cost of service energy rate is $27.00 3. Cost of BPA wheel and losses from PacifiCorp boundary to market hub is $2.50 4. Cost of BPA wheel and losses from market hub to PacifiCorp boundary is $2.50 Current Calculation - Sale of energy at market hub Gross proceeds on sale: $43.00 Charge: BPA Wheel: Net proceeds: (forward price of power at hub) $ 2.50 (cost of delivery to hub) $40.50 ( net proceeds on sale at hub) Calculate: Transition Credit: $40.50 ( net proceeds on sale) PacifiCorp Cost of Service Rate: - $27.00 Transition Credit: $13.50 Direct Access Customer pays: $43.00 (forward price of power at hub) + $ 2.50 (BPA wheel to PacifiCorp boundary) - $13.50 (Transition Credit from PacifiCorp) NET: $32.00 ($5.00 premium over cost of service) Proposed Calculation Avoided Purchase at market hub Avoided cost at hub: $43.00 (forward price of power at hub) Avoided cost: BPA wheel + $ 2.50 (cost of delivery from hub to PacifiCorp) Total avoided cost: $45.50 (total of avoided purchase) Calculate: Transition Credit: $45.50 (total avoided purchase cost) PacifiCorp Cost of Service Rate: - $27.00 Transition Credit: $18.50 Direct Access Customer pays: $ 43.00 (forward price of power at hub) + $ 2.50 (BPA wheel: hub to PacifiCorp boundary) - $18.50 (Transition Credit from PacifiCorp) NET: $27.00 Parity with PacifiCorp cost of service Exhibit A - Page 1