Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Light and Power 1994-05-12. 3. , AGENDA Light and l'ower Coitiimiittee May 12, 1994 8:00 a. ni., Board Room 1. Resource Integration Study o Jay Hopper, Platte River Power Authority 2. Definition of Residential and Commercial Customer 3. Reports A. Financial Report B. Project Updates C. R.M.E.L. Spring Conference-Evaluations D. Platte River Power Authority NOTE: The Light and Power Committee reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the agenda was prepared. f .1, I TOWN OF ESTES PARK May 11, 1994 OFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Light and Power Committee FROM: Richard E. Matzk*74-2-7,-~ SUBJECT: Definition of Residential and Commercial Electric Customers In January of 1994, the Town Board approved a water rate ordinance which included more precise definitions for the residential and commercial customer classes. A summary of those definitions is attached. The Light and Power Department recommends that these definitions be applied to electric customers as a department practice and then be included in the Town's electric ordinance upon the next revision. This will allow consistent application of residential and commercial rates to water and electric customers of the Town. REM 2-1 t L4 ' 01/05/93 TOWN OF ESTES PARK , ) IlESIDENTIAL CIJSTOMER CLASS A Residential water customer is defined as a customer whose water lise is for a primary living quarters and the majority of the water consumption is for personal, not commercial, use. COMMERCIAL CUSTOMER CLASS A Commercial water customer is defined as being categorized into one or more of the following groups: 1. Accommodations 2. Shops 3. Bed and Breakfast 4. Eateries 5. Campgrounds 6. Schools 7. Churches 8. Governmental and Utility agencies 9. Dwelling unit tliat is rented out for a billing period of less titan 30 days 10. Customers other than Residential If it is di fficult to categorize a customer into one of the above-mentioned groups, the Town staff shall decide. PUMPED FLOW CUSTOMER CLASS A Pumped Flow customer is defined as a customer that cannot be serviced by gravity from the i water system and requires a Town-maintained pump station for service. BULK WATER CUSTOMER CLASS A Bulk Water customer is defined in Section 13.38.010. 2-2 f *t I N O 00.r I m I 01-76•moo It-11 N 1 1-1 Col 1 N cO Ch h thi m ul '.0 00 r-1 u-1 1 1-1 1 LD tot r-1 1 O 1 T-Noo~ Iml 0-,000=•lornIMI 0 ¢ m I W 1 mil ....1 . 1 .. . . ..1 .1 .1 -1 -1 06-1 1 100•Nm INI =·coinorim 171 aol L.0 1 Al 0, 1 1 M r-Imm 1 .-11 01 Ch Ch •=r CO I .-1 1 0, l lC) 1 L.0 1 el >1 1 1-1 INI 1-1 0 f-\1 rl ,-1 0 l A i NI 1 0.1 1 1 -1 . 1 .1 It .1 IN IN 1 0 1 -11 1 1 "-1 1 Ita 1 00 C. ./ .1 1 Ir t mic,vt-LO Im/ r--11 0 1 mi 14•Woot-Imt m401-000,1-01011 7 110 1 9 1 01 m(NG'.rr lot Momrn.-It- 1 1- 1 NIC'•1 hl m 1 1 . . ..1 -1 ---- 1 .1 . 1 1 . 1 c.• E--1 1 Ni tom I t- 1 LO£04'13,0 101 ID 1 1 r-1 1 WIIN m 1 10 1 gdOme Ill I ,-1 1 1 10 1 1-1 Z 1 1,1 1 in I 04 .-1 1 .t I r-1 1 1 / 1 Itn Ich ·1· 00,mt 12- an o A O 1 1- 1 U) I W'I 0,1 I N O 10 1 G 1 Inmloootrlm I r-It t-INI mI 1 Ul N tri I N I VNWOMOIHI 00 1 0,1 m I mi 1 -1 . . . . ..1 -1 .1 .1 -1 7 1 1 4•mlo 1 / 1 4•ANNHN I LI) 1 00 1,0 1 N I 03 e l t-N N 1 N 1 ait-lon:m 1 0 1 (11/-1 t- 1 01110 1.-It .-1 O N A N 1 co 1 N 1 1 0 1 r-1 >4 1 4 1 -1 - 1 -1 It .1 1 N 1 04 1 •-1 1 •-1 1 1 1 r-1 1 lin 1 In W P- 0 1 CO l 4'LrIC'Imt.Olf) 1 eli m too 1 01 1 1 11 It -lili 1 CO Ln Ln I Chi LDul.-100 N e 1 0, 1 M to 1 0, 1 94 14 w O 1 r-1,000 1 co l ~00 LO O LO 1 .11 1 h 1 01 1 W I =11 1 1 .1 1 -1 . 1 -1 ..1 U} M A H mE-1 1 Ulint- 1 00 1 ba-,mil• 1 0, 1 O I T I U) 1 W W E-1 M milo 1 7-1 1 Ve.tornal Iml N 1 1 4 1 r-1 Elin . 1 10 1 1 thi N 1 1 1-1 1 u] 0 E-10< 1 0 It -1 1 1 WAIU] lillil 0 1:1 1 1 11 1 1 CL, t•ZIWZ O EH E-4 0 A Z te U Z 3 /5 Ztll 01-IH lit lilli E-4 4 0 toomotril MOU-104'OINI eli O I MI 1 /O 0 co I .r 1 1004'N UILO 1 m I r-I t U-1 1 00 1 p 1 r-lult- 1 7 1 r--IOLOU-14'LO I vi l .-Ilt.Al 00 1 4. (11) 1 --- 1 -1 ... . ..1 -1 .1 .1 . 1 1 0.0,1 01 0 .0 1 4,1 4·00'Clhm 14'l Nicol MI 0, •0 1 h h m 1 00 1 t--000,00•-1 17 1 v tool m 1 r-1 DIO r-1 1011 tne.loomt- too / . 1 1 1 mt 1 lo 1 <0 1 m I in I 1 1 10 1 mi . 1 -1 - 1 -1 It -1 1 4, 1 11 It 11 1 01 0 4 0 a 0 4 0 WE-4 a) D H 1.4 0 Id 7504 0 ' S W 6< 4-1 U > U •rt 5 8- MN S 0 0 4) ti. O 1 11 11 11 1 It lilli 1 11 11 11 1 1 11 It 11 1 11 11 /1 1 1 11 11 11 1 1 11 11 11 1 1 It 11 11 1 It 1/ 11 1 1 11 It 11 1 1 11 11 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 It It I W C Oill X r-1 O 0 4) W W 4 4-4 >1 4.1 0 -m 4.1 14 -1 d \ ,-1 C C 01 1 C U Ul rd OR 9 10 0 00 34 49' C O ·rl mt! .N E-lu}oup A •,4 4 4 0 0 44 4 W 1-1 1-1 U N W COW#41 [14 ¤ 0 U r-1 0 M ·rl A (11 14 WZ p CD C r-1 01 b U I ·r-1 E ·rl CIM C 0 01 CD (11 U E-1 rd U W O C - 0, dJ W 1-4 1-1 U C) H 4 6494·4 (11 U W rd 1-1 ta +J O d) :1 0 to E P U} A W .C M ·rl C Z 01 O •r-1 :1 'C C 10 0 UUZH MOU]OUKH mo: U M um . >4> M ·WO SSL'ZPZ$ Z6Z'5II$ *56'ISI$ (I00'LZE$) (6Ek'99$) 1994 & 1993 SlfINEAXE .20 S(~~ )~ JX3 for Services TOTAL REVE IGNEEX3 UY.I.01 aneous rest 0 CD LL m MM W31SAS 3a-2 5/11/94 -0- 1992 15000 ~ -0-1993 *66 K -1,- ODa PO deS Dnv Inr unr id¥ q uer TOWN OF ESTES PARK PURCHASE POWER-DEMAND LOADHIST.XLS 19000 18000 17000 16000 000*L 000£k 00011 - 000 k L 011 0 ., t 1. . 1 1 1. 1.11.1.1 1.1 . 11. 1.1111.1111111.1 1.1 1.1 .. 1........ 1...1 1 0 , 1 1 1 HMM A1H1NOW 3a-3 LOADHIST.XLS 5/5/94 01992 £661. 0 - ~ ~ ~" ~" ~ "~~ ~" -- -- - 000'000'9 *66 L m oaa AoN 100 deS Bnv Inr unr Ae'Al Jdv Je IN qad uer MONTHLY ENERGY PURCHASES 10,000,000 8,000,000 - 7,000,000 - - - -7 - 000'000'* - 2 - 000'000'£ -- - 000'0002 9,000,000 6,000,000 - - 000'000'L 1,1,11,1.1. 1'' 1,1,1111.11: : Fi**Fet.%9*#yeaw:Ff#412***K<'ER*"·B";%,--'-">-'»~*.-~·„..9'02*9459 ~-:,-;:48«4134'>.< 44/49%.·%·42?:N c-33%22*3*%8,4*%*-469 FR,40'4~#,94-F~44 '1 1 1 1 1 1 1 CD t 03SVHOHnd HMM O.LA 3a-4 2 1992 50,000,000 · · ·· O 1993 01994 80,000,000 70,000,000 60,000,000 - 000'000'0* 000'000'0£ 000'000'01 000'000'0 L . 1 Ll' 11 1 1./.11'111'111.1.11 11 111.1 4 1 -6 -A -1 1 1 -' 4 11111111111 111111 1 111 1 111 1111111111 1 1 111111111, 1 111 111 11 1 1111111 1 1 1 1 1 111 11 11 1 1 ($) 93-IVS A-IH-1.NOW 3a-5 5/11/94 • 1992 £66 L O - 000'09'P *66 L m oaa AoN 100 des Snv Inr unr Ae,\1 Jdv Jel,N qa=1 uer - ···.···· ···· - 000'00£ ESTES PARK LIGHT AND POWER DEPARTMENT ELECTRIC SALES BY MONTH SALEHIST.XLS 600,000 550,000 -- 500,000 -- - - 000'09£ -- 000'00* , L.- L MM i • i,11,•••'••i~••i Ef..........-I---.-. '."' . Rympmmimmi~#MRSK'p~movmfrm",Imi 1 ..1 Lt r77"+777 0 1 ($) S31VS 31¥0 01 bIV3A 3a-6 SALEHIST.XLS 5/11/94 /1992 £661.0 -- 000'000'£ *66 L m 000 AoN 100 des 5nv Inc unr ABIAI Jdv JEIN qa=1 uer ESTES PARK LIGHT AND POWER DEPARTMENT YEAR TO DATE ELECTRIC SALES 6,000,000 5,000,000 4,000,000 000'000'Z - 000'000'L 11 1. ·:2·:4:<·S:<·::krdS:kem: 1 1 1 11, g O C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N „7 ($) 93-IVS 3140 01 hl¥3A 3a-7 m BUDGE1 OACTUAL 4,UUU,UUU 3,000,000 - - - « X ¤ I X X X X 00 X UN X O X 1.0 X V X - CO 1 -M X (MM) 0401 W31SAS 3a-8 APR94LD.XLS 5/11/94 X X 0 -0- 4/5/94 46/2/4 -9- 39¥hIBAV-*- 000' L L ESTES PARK LIGHT AND POWER DEPARTMENT *Z EZ ZE LE 01 6L QL LL 9L GL *L EL ZL LL OL 6 DAILY LOAD CURVES 14,000 13,000 12,000 000'0, ''-ma 000'6 000'9 SPRING CONFERENCE EVALUATION ~ 1994 (36 Responses) 17% vx. 13% In 1993 , Number of Responses --- Poor Fair Good Excellent . --- Overall Opinion 2 21 9 Were topics on Target? | General Sessions 5 17 8 I Customer Svcs/Pub Affairs , 10 4 General Management 1 1 10 8 Generation 2 10 7 Trans & Dist 13 3 Meeting Rooms 1 13 13 Meals 12 24 Sunday Reception 2 5 25 Monday Dinner 2 12 20 AMEL registration 1 7 29 * Very good conference. * Best spring session I have attended. * Very goodl It has been a few years since the last RMEL confer- ence, but there has been a vast Improvement. Keep up the good ~ workll * Please put Information about appropriate dress In the pre- registration materials and In newsletter. * Good conference -- need time to support local community. ; * Overall, an excellent program In excellent facilities by excel- lent staff. Congrats! * Excellent place for our conference. It was great! - * Hans Kosten should not have been on program and allowed to cancel. I Slide projector was 'poor In Generation sessions. Did not focus automatically. *It was difficult to Jump from one concurrent session to another and remain on schedule; 1.e., Generation to T & D, to etc. * Take more breaks -- no more than an hour without a short break. Albertson's talk had nothing to do with global partnering, as near as I could tell. Albertson did not address topic and was bad. General Session -- Tuesday morning only OK: Monday was quite : good. Algney good speaker -- not sure topic was totally appropriate. Allow more time for queetlons. Dr. Maurice Albertgon -- good subject matter; hard to follow or stay with him. Humor le a good wrapup -- Jon did a great Job. Meeting rooms a little cold on Mon. * Concurrent sessions good -- would like to see more specific topics about productivity, work rules and business practices, a panel on OBM electric distribution. * Lack of dynamic speakers -- suggest that all speakers be recom- mended by someone that hag heard them speak before. * What has H2 got to do with Global Partnering? * Better lighting control In meeting parlors. Audio system In Tuesday general session wae distracting. » »** .* S 11· PLATTE RIVER POWER AUTHORITY IRP -20 COMMON QUESTIONS- 1. What is IRP and why is Platte River involving the public? What is Platte River asking the public for? IRP stands for Integrated Resource Planning, a process for evaluating new energy resources to meet customers' electrical energy service needs. Fossil-fuel powered resources are compared with demand side management (DSM) and renewable energy sources (wind and solar) to help choose the lowest cost mix of resource options. Cost effective DSM is the lowest cost resource, but it will not completely meet resource needs. To meet the remaining need, Platte River can build new generation or reduce surplus sales and increase rates. Since these options affect the rates which customers pay, we are asking customers for input on their preferred resource options. 2. Is the decision on reducing the federal hydro electric capacity already made? If not, will Platte River try to stop the change? Who will make the final decision? How can I have input into this process? To date, no final decisions have been made. The federal government, as operator of the federal dams, is conducting environmental impact studies (EIS). The EIS calls for changes in the operation of the hydroelectric system which would reduce Platte River's hydro power allocation by as much as 74 MW. The federal government is asking for public comments by June of 1994. The federal government will evaluate the comments and reach a Record of Decision by the end of 1995 on how it will operate the dams. Platte River has commented on the impact the loss of federal hydro will have along the Northern Front Range of Colorado, both environmentally and economically. Any comments should be made to the Western Area Power Administration by June of 1994. 3. Is it true that most of the electricity from Rawhide Energy Station is surplus to the member cities' needs and is sold to Public Service? If so, why? Why can't Platte River simply use the Rawhide electricity to serve the City load? Currently, 218 MW of Platte River's 421 MW of coal-fired generation (Rawhide Unit One and Craig Units One and Two) is sold to Public Service. This 218 MW sale is from Platte River's aggregate thermal resources, and is not tagged specifically to Rawhide. The central issue in this question is whether Platte River's surplus capacity should be recovered from reduced sales to Public Service and used to replace one-for-one the lost federal hydro capacity. This can be done, but would not be an attractive option for the following reasons: • Operationally, a base load unit makes an inefficient and awkward peaking unit. When a base load unit is continually ramped up and down, the overall thermal efficiency is seriously degraded. A base load unit cannot be turned on and off on short notice like a peaking unit, but must run continuously. • Environmentally, the lower thermal efficiency results in higher emissions. The complicated environmental controls are also in a transitional state when the unit is ramping up'and down, again resulting in increased emissions. • Financially, the installed cost of a peaking unit is considerably less expensive than a base load unit. The sale to Public Service reflects the value of a base load unit. Using base load capacity to replace lost peaking capacity has a serious impact on Platte River's wholesale rate. 4. Why not ration electricity or make electricity more expensive to encourage conservation? Platte River does not sell power at retail and has no direct control over electricity consumption. The member Cities sell power to their customers at a price structure they determine. Platte River's mission is to provide reliable power at the lowest long term cost to the Cities in a way that is sensitive to the environment. Platte River sends a strong price signal to the Cities through its rate structure to encourage the Cities to reduce their peak consumption. It is not currently in Platte River's mission to force customers to change their life styles. 1 ·1. Electricity can be rationed only by society in general, through direct financial penalties or other indirect administrative procedures. 5. Does Platte River plan for new generating resources jointly with the other area utilities to do what is best for the region? What steps are being taken to ensure that the assumptions for future electric needs are valid and will not result in building unneeded generation? Yes. Platte River is a charter member of the Colorado Coordinated Planning Group, consisting of all of the electric generation and transmission utilities in Colorado, Utah and Wyoming, and independent power producers. During semi-annual meetings the group exchanges and discusses each utilities resource plan. Platte River feels it is in the best interest of everyone in the region to participate in joint generation and transmission projects whenever the needs of the regional utilities can be met by a joint project. Platte River, Estes Park, Fort Collins, Longmont, and Loveland annually project their future load growth independently, then come to consensus on a load forecast for Platte River and the Four Cities. This process helps to cross check the assumptions used in each forecast and to minimize the risk of building a new resource or delaying a new resource based on an inaccurate load forecast. Also, by planning smaller phased projects, Platte River cuts the lead time required to build a project, allowing us to delay the decision to build a new resource for as long as possible. 6. Is Platte River regulated by the Colorado Public Utilities Commission? If not, who does regulate Platte River? Platte River is exempt from the jurisdiction of the Colorado Public Utilities Commission by virtue of Article XXV of the Colorado Constitution. Platte River is a municipally owned utility, and a political subdivision and public corporation of the State of Colorado. - Platte River is governed by an eight-member Board of Directors, all of wh6m are public officials. Each of the four member Cities (Estes Park, Fort Collins, Longmont, and Loveland) appoinfs two representatives to the Board of Directors, one of whom is traditionally the mayor. The Board of Directors is charged with the overall conduct and direction of Platte River and sets wholesale rates, enters into contracts, issues debt, authorizes Platte River to construct or purchase resources, and exercises power of condemnation. The Board of Directors governs Platte River in compliance with all federal or state laws and regulations. 7. Are renewable generation sources given serious consideration in the Resource Integration Study? Yes, Platte River has studied the capability of solar and wind to supply power during our peak load conditions, based on our need for peaking power. The availability of solar is a good match to summer peak, but solar power is unavailable during winter peak. Wind power generation has a poor correlation to both winter and summer peak hours. There are fairly good sites for the generation of energy from both solar and wind in the region, but the characteristics of Platte River's load differ too much from.the availability of solar and wind power for them to be able to meet Platte River's need for peaking power. Platte River has no need for an additional supply of energy since our existing resources are able to supply our energy needs. 8. Would the cost of renewables decrease if more were used? If so, have these reduced costs been taken into account in the economic evaluation? The cost of renewable resources could decrease if they were manufactured in large scale, mass production processes. In order for this to happen the market has to be in place to be able to absorb the product from these mass production facilities. Since these large markets have yet to be established, no manufacturer of renewable generation equipment has been willing to put the investment into a new mass production facility. Since it is difficult to determine when any renewable technology will go into mass production and what the cost of equipment will be once this is done, Platte River has performed its evaluations based on today's costs for renewable technologies. 2 9. Will the loss of WAPA hydropower lead to more air pollution? If so, how much more? Based upon our limited knowledge of actual operating scenarios, it is difficult to determine if there will be a net increase or decrease in pollutants on a national basis or even on a western regional basis. There will likely be an increase in pollutant loading on a sub-regional basis along the Front Range and in other urban localities such as Salt Lake City. This increase in sub-regional pollutant loading will be the direct result of having to rely on fossil-fuel generation during peak periods when localized pollution loading is maximized by poor meteorological conditions. When it gets cold and still outside, we'll be relying on local generation which will increase local pollution. 10. Is Platte River participating in the Global Climate Change Action Plan? If so, what specifically has Platte River agreed to do? Yes, Platte River sent a letter to the Secretary of Energy in March 1994 indicating our interest in working with the Department of Energy to develop a voluntary Climate Compact under which we would help to stabilize greenhouse gas emissions at 1990 levels by the year 2000. At this juncture Platte River is working with the Department of Energy, academic institutions, and citizen groups to determine the most effective means to accomplish this goal. Possible activities include DSM, biomass conversion, hydropower, efficiency improvements, and carbon immobilization (growing biomass). 11. Are externalities being considered by Platte River in the Integrated Resource Plan? Environmental externalities are non-monetized costs which to this point have only been roughly defined. Platte River has attempted to clearly identify all tangible environmental impacts. Platte River has spent a large amount of money already to mitigate tangible environmental impacts in our operations. We will continue to follow the issue closely and at this point Platte River is in concert with the Colorado Public Utilities 2 7.¥ Commission and the U.S. Department of Energy that it is not feasible to include extemalities in an IRP study at this time. 12. What amount of Demand Side Management (DSM) can Platte River expect to offset the need for new resources? 1 Estimates currently range from 2 MW to 26 MW. Since DSM potential exists only at the retail level, the Cities will be responsible for the final DSM impact estimates which will be used to develop the Integrated Resource a Plan. Estes Park, Longmont and Loveland have developed preliminary estimates of DSM impact. Combined, these would lead to approximately 2 MW by 1999. Fort Collins is in the process of developing their estimates, so the total combined City estimate will likely be greater than 2 MW. Also, two local DSM consulting firms have developed estimates indicating a combined potential of 16 to 26 MW (1999). Finally, assuming that the DSM programs considered in Public Service Companfs IRP were applied to Platte River's Cities, DSM potential would amount to about 16 MW (1999). 13. What would the rate impact of this level of DSM be? Assuming 26 MW of DSM was developed by 1999, Platte River's wholesale rate would likely increase by about 1% over what it would be with no DSM. This comparison assumes that 74 MW of federal hydro power will be lost and that DSM was used to offset building or purchasing peaking power. At the retail level, the rate impacts would be greater. These impacts are currently being evaluated by each member City. 14. Would Platte River sell more electricity to Public Service if the Cities' load were reduced due to DSM? Current agreements would allow Platte River to increase sales to Public Service Company of Colorado by about 4 MW in the summer season and by 9 MW in the winter season, beginning in April 1996. Between 1997 and 2003, sales could be increased from between 3 MW and 16 MW in the summer and from between 6 MW and 9 MW in the winter (depending on the year considered). 3 el f 15. Do the Rawhide Energy Station's emissions impact Member Cities air quality? Rawhide Energy Station emissions may occasionally impact air quality in Member Cities. Less than 16% of the time prevailing winds blow from the north or northeast towards Member Cities from Rawhide. The predominant prevailing winds blow from the west to northwest towards the eastern plains. It is likely that some emissions from Rawhide reach Member Cities. But considering that nearly all pollutants are removed before air is discharged from the plant the total emissions affecting Member Cities is very small. 16. Does Platte River own excess emission credits? What are emission credits worth in this IRP process? Emission allowances will be issued annually for operation of Rawhide Unit One and Craig Units One'and Two starting in 2000. Currently, Platte River's allocation of allowances is expected to be greater than that required to operate these units. However, the number of allowances issued to Platte River has recently been reduced and will likely decrease further over time to meet the national goal of maintaining S02 emissions at 1990 levels. The current value of allowances is about $135 each. This is expected to increase over time as fewer allowances are issued. Considering the potential future value of these allowances, the current value and the prospect for further allocation reductions, Platte River Boes not plan to sell any future emission credits in advance of their issuance. The value of emissions credits is not considered in the economic analysis associated with this IRP. 17. Will Platte River replace all existing coal-fired power plants with natural gas or renewables? Will you switch fuel at the Rawhide plant? Platte River has no intention of converting existing coal units to natural gas. The Denver Brown Cloud Study participants and Platte River have both recently completed an evaluation for retrofiting with natural gas. Potential emission reductions, the cost of retrofiting facilities, natural gas cost and supply stability all have led Platte River to determine that there is no net environmental or economic benefit to retrofiling new, clean, coal-fired complexes like Rawhide and Craig. 18. How long would it take to add a natural gas-fired peaking unit if it is needed? The lead time required before a natural gas-fired peaking unit could begin generating power depends on the project. The Fort St. Vrain natural gas-fired combined cycle plant is already in the design and permitting phase and would be built in stages. The first phase could be on line as soon as early 1996. If Platte River were to add a combustion turbine to the Rawhide Station, it would take about three years to complete the project. 19. How much base load, intermediate, and peaking load is optimal for Platte River? To serve a 300 MW peak load, we currently have 200 MW of base load resources, and 100 MW of combined intermediate and peaking resources. This has been quite adequate in the past. Studies are underway, and will be for quite a while, to determine the optimum mix. In general, it appears that Platte River has sufficient base load resources and any new resources will be of the intermediate or peaking variety. Some resources work quite well as both intermediate and peaking units, and hence the distinction can be fuzzy. While we cannot give an exact answer at this time, the intuitive answer is that Platte River is heavy on base load and short on intermediate and peaking capacity. 20. What impact will increased electric rates have on the local economy? Higher electric rates hit low and fixed income citizens the hardest. Additionally, although this region enjoys some of the lowest electric rates in the country, if Platte River's rates increase it will cause large industrials to consider purchasing on-site generation. This decision would move production of electricity into the populated air basin on machines that are not as efficient as the central generating stations. One large industrial customer has already told the Loveland City Council that a significant rate increase would cause them to move their facility out of Colorado. 4 PLATTE |~ POWER RIVER AUTHORITY Integrated Resource Study EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Platte River Power Authority ("Platt River") has recently completed a Resource Integration Study, developed to help facilitate public dialogue in the resource planning process. This study highlights current issues associated with developing an Integrated Resource Plan ("IRP") for Platt River. Platte River generates and transmits electricity for Estes Park, Fort Collins, Longmont and Loveland ("Cities") and the Cities distribute the electricity to their retail customers. A "resource" is a source of electricity (e.g., coal-fired power plant, hydropower or solar power) and "integrated resource planning" is a process for evaluating new energy resource alternatives, in order to meet customers' electrical energy service requirements in a reliable, cost-effective and environmentally responsible manner. Major points addressed in the study can be summarized as follows: 1 Since its inception in 1973, Platte River has used integrated planning to maintain low City rates with environmentally sensitive resources. These resources include Rawhide Unit 1,20 miles north of Fort Collins (100% ownership), Craig Units 1 &2 near Craig, Colorado (18% ownership) and purchase contracts which provide federal hydropower. The hydropower produces no air emis- sions, strict emission control equipment exists on all of the coal units, the coal burned is low in sul- phur and none of Platte River's plants are located in the Front Range air basin. These existing resources are adequate to meet the Cities' requirements for more than 20 years. 2. The existing hydropower contracts are managed by the Western Area Power Administration (WAI?A), which is part of the federal Department of Energy (DOE). Platte River currently faces three risks associated with the WAPA resource: (i) it may be reduced significantly (by as much as 60%), (ii) the flexibility to use it for following changes in City loads may be substantially changed, and (iii) the cost may be dramatically increased. All of these changes could happen beginning as early as the fall of 1995. If these changes occur, Platte River will need to acquire a replacement resource. The size and timing of the replacement resource will depend on the amount and timing of the hydropower loss. Platte River currently uses the WAPA hydropower to meet fluctuations in the Cities' load requirements. Therefore, this study focuses on replacement options which can efficiently follow fluctuating load (often referred to as "peaking" resources, since they provide power at or near the time of maximum or"peak" customer usage). 3. The rate impact of the potential changes in WAPA hydropower capacity, flexibility and cost is significant and dependent on resource decisions which are made. Assuming that the maximum amount of loss being considered occurs in late 1995, resource replacement options considered thus far would lead to rate increases of between 8% and 20% (over the current base case) by 1999. Programs which reduce the peak combined with a natural gas-fired peaking unit appears the most attractive peaking replacement option from a rates perspective at this time. 4. Since 1978, the Cities and Platte River have developed over 100 joint and individual pro- grams to encourage efficient generation, transmission, digtribution and use of energy. These existing programs are estimated to account for about 16 MW of system peak load reduction (out of a total peak load of about 300 MW). Efforts which attempt to affect changes in the way customers use electricity are often referred to as Demand Side Management or "DSM" programs. Though Platte River suppons DSM, the bulk of the DSM potential exists at the retail customer level. Platte River is responsible for generating and transmitting electricity and the Cities are responsible for distribu- tion and for activities at the retail level, including DSM. Platte River plans to continue support of DSM programs, particularly those which can help control usage at the time of the system peak, through wholesale rate structure and continued joint efforts with the Cities. 5. As indicated in recent air quality studies, vehicles are the major source of pollution in the Front Range of Colorado. Power plants located in the Front Range air basin contribute less than 6% of the "brown cloud." Even though none of Platte River's power plants are located in the Front Range air basin, Platte River spends about 10% of its annual budget for pollution control. This expenditure leads to relatively low emissions from the coal plants. For example, the Rawhide plant operates with S02 emissions about ten times lower than the maximum allowed by federal regula- tions. Characteristics of Platte River's existing resources allow production of electricity with virtu- ally no impact on air quality along the Colorado Front Range. As replacement resource options are reviewed, impact on air quality in the region as well as in the Cities will be considered. 6. Other utilities in the region would also be affected by the changes in federal hydropower allocations. Depending on the magnitude of the total regional loss of hydropower and limits on flexibility of use, other types of resources may be considered as the planning process proceeds. For example, if the remaining hydropower is higher in cost and is limited in flexibility, other resource options may be more cost effective, leading to lower wholesale rates. Risks associated with existing hydropower purchases are due to proposed changes in flow patterns through generating facilities on the Colorado River. These proposed changes are a result of environ- mental studies attempting to evaluate stream flow impacts on plants and animals in and along the river. Several interests, including rafters, fisherman, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and environ- mental groups, support restricted fluctuating flows. Currently, the flows are varied through the day to meet changes in customers' use of electricity. The proposed changes would severely limit power production at peak usage time and flexibility of scheduling generation, and would require production of power from other sources. Most likely, these sources would burn fossil-fuels (coal and natural gas). This would be the case whether Platte River replaces the potential loss of hydropower with new resources of its own or WAPA acquires resources to replace the loss. Hydropower has long been considered an environmentally favorable, renewable source of power. This form of power generation consumes only the potential energy of falling water and produces none of the air emissions common to facilities consuming fossil fuels. Major economic and envi- ronmental questions exist related to flow variations on the rivers. Use of the hydropower units reduces the need for fossil-fueled generation, but may negatively impact river plants and animals, sport fishing and rafting. A draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) has been published, but no order has been delivered regardingallocation changes. Impact estimates used in this Resource Study are based on the maxi- mum impact scenario discussed in the EIS. If plans for addressing the maximum level of loss are developed and the power reductions are less than the maximum impact scenario, these plans may be scaled back to match the actual reduction. This Resource Integration Study was completed to help inform the public on issues related to resource planning and to gather public input on the planning process. As detailed in the study, pub- lic consultation on the process began in February, with a presentation of issues to Platt River's Board of Directors. This Resource Integration Study will be developed into a preliminary draft Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) between February and May, and a final draft IRP will be presented to the public at a Platt River Board meeting in August. Once approved by the Platte River Board, the 1994 IRP will be filed to satisfy requirements of the National Energy Policy Act of 1992, and ' 1 will be made available to the Cities and their constituents, utilities in the region and other affected , 1 interests. - Platte River intends to conduct public participation efforts in concert with technical work on the IRR Based on public input and additional technical evaluation of resource options, the IRP will be updat- " ed over time. Several public participation activities are planned, including joint open house work- shops at each of the Cities. A tentative schedule for these workshops is summarized below: s City Date Related Activity Estes Park April 22 Earth Day Fort Collins April 23 Earth Day Longmont May 21 Family Fun Day Loveland April 24 Earth Day Thank you for your interest in this process. If you have any questions regarding this study or resource planning in·general, please contact either your local City electric department or Platte River Power Authority. Platte River Power Authority 2000 East Horsetooth Road Forta Collins, Colorado 80525-5721 303-226-4000 u DId eOJ n Ose21 B Integrated C U 05 Integrated Resource Plan U O !10 nl - - - :.w,Ad.* 1, -- J Bks09N8-2»6~*16%R~68*mMS@~*0-m--m~**@n,mmata, - g E - E 7E \At:::::::::::::::::::::::::- ................................2 U r3 ......................................z 1 1 CN pil. 0 Ibl r- O *9 CD - Colorado Utilities River ber Cities o orado Uti ities -e Comparison (500 kWh of Residential Use) Wh -80*0 -90 0 -PO.0 - ZO 0 lili - 1+111 11 -.11.. . : t· :=- 1 119==e--Jill I . 0 O 0 U .g)06 - 32 A c -c F. 0 > 0 5.-i -C ¤ LUM 2 0. 1I1I11 *CX) 4)1*1(11 61(:014:) 4:r~C\1~0 00 ri - ul-rl 36DJOAV National - Average @ SO2 Emissions Stulold JaMOC| pe]!=I-IDOD OPIOJOIOD Ilv C DCNI- X 'pod ./ + /1 0 L U / 3 65 5 k (1) 5 - -C U LUM ~11111111111111 ~ 9- 01 0 00 © 1- 01 0 p- p- p- 06¤JeAV =missions Colorado SJUDIC' 38*\od Pel!=I-IDOD opoioloD Ilv -O ~ UP Q- 2 -1 0 Integrated Resource Plan 0 CNI 0 S 41 2 - CN fl - . !2 ~ OO X p-- LU r- 1I1I 1 l1l 111 0000000 Ol.r)OLOOLO e Chi 01 111,,11111,1'1'11 --1,11,1,11,1,0JPX!41.1-1,1,1,1,11,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1 73 9[ Curren- Resource Scied u e 100 MW Peaking IDul]341 pool es¤21 ADD JoinoH Load (MW) ... ... 01 CO 2 7,0 D¤ Ua OE 9[ n- River - ow Xol JO inoH Pattern River Flow Maximum ll]All]!u!\N - 0 ~0 11 - 01 OO - 1=28=L Xt 0 O n FE OZ Da i y Pa n (Simplified) River ADD jO JAOH River Flow Maximum l.Unlll !u !0/ 0. ING. 1 NE -4 : t. '/19.l/ = t. i j:21= .-1. : 2-01 ~ 044 .th · NO 3% 3 tt .... : A:r- r-- 1lll1I1I1II 0000 000 0 10 0 1.0 O LO 01 01 - FE 03 iroposec Resource Sciecu e Xog joinoH sAu! 4 8909 MW 08 4. 4. Load CMW) ~* Integrated Resource Plan suo'tdo 1£ O (D == 0 3.8 6 2 0 C -g< (1) C- 2 NE 0 U J OG 0 k U a) 2~ 3 -v Eu-¤ 8 8>-O 100 00 ic 0- ¤CL OLU 0- ¤ U ~68 < 1 41 44 11111I1I1I1 9 70! 000 9 3 Xt rt Xt .rt (') Cr) C., Rates to Cities (cents/kWh) hase replacement capacity energy from Western Area 00!Alas 3!Iqnd oisel 4!0¤dDD luelll eoinosei Bu!>load ssol ou Builungs opo-10103 do Xuod ministration 33/'Aod 666 L , 866 l , 266 L , 966 1 , 966 l 10-en-ia Ra-e mpac 4!O!]loele uo!·10-49!u!ll.1 od X8Jaue J Su!19!Xe U.JOJJ M 0 -2 -0 0 B (|) * LL 1 3~t R C , 1 0 0 lilli 1 1 1 1 000 O 0 VD to rt |003 qJnl gltIOD WSG 1 1 JDIOS Costs IR 3?212 e Cost (cents/1<Wh) -08 -OZ 505:9.-5/W.nam>:28/··»»-/«·mr·.««¢-Rer¥e:/I7>·In>·.........."·.0.¥*IN..Ye...·~5·~·1·-I.«74. ; ¤V n , 1 O @ ·e>%...2.:·9>·:.9.9.:2 (D k E 10 - 16l 1 111 0 00 M IDOD gni qUJOD WSCI PU!AA Jolos -09 Resource Av Summer Availability (%) 100 -0 F -07 . 0/Ct 0 0 (A (D (1) (D ,= C (D C -- I- (D (D (DO Wx U Otc LU . LU* to 0 --4- 0 ~ 0 4,6 (D ...... q) Q- ,-, 0 0- 09 96 - 2 -:r ....... .... Q--0 .- ....... IC :E:.: E ~:*9 02 CL -~ f./ -- . ..1 . . . . . . .. . . . . . I . . 7.- h . rim .. r- 00 (/D > -U UJ D J .0) I- . sel JuelleD'<3 JOADj Aol 8103 019!Wrille u Opti:on Meet~51 FPrd 901 tue ~N lood eluos 0*9 0 Sd aonpazi luellox3 ewos Bupload esolpind DSM (Peak Clipping) Favorable/Some Excellent Summary 0- anc Demand- J01¤@d pling VdVAA LU04 Dld C o ---- C.LU CL ..2 . U -- 4 *Rn diogg 0 E Z " iR CLO . 1 . . . . 1 r..1.1- . . . . . . . . 8 2,2, - .::g o kin:8 CD C ots 2.c., - 1 7 D.!2 WC A J o Li-· - IN 0 'Ul ... 1:; lit I ::9: Leir. ir:/i -1 -...... (1) 4 0 0 u........... ........ 16 : ::* E kh :*: LE*>::4* 04:<0 a> £ d- E 69 5 1 ™ a .92 . - U¤ 1722:...m.......................... ........... . 994 Oub ic -orum Sc ied u e 2 (Fri) 20 (Wed) ay 17 (Tue) 12 (Tue) (dn-Mollod el E es Park Collins ont eland Council Council