HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Light and Power 1994-10-10* -ro AGENDA Light and Power Committee November 10, 1994 8:00 a.m., Board Room 1. Platte River/Four Cities Joint Integrated Resource Plan o John Bleem 2. Proposed Emergency Generator Peak Shaving Rebate Program 3. Electric Extension to Rocky Mountain National Park 4. Reports A. Financial Report : B. Platte River Member Cities Customer Survey C. Electric Thermal Storage Heat Program Progress Report 1 D. Project Updates E. 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.
TOWN OF ESTES PARK November 9, 1994 OFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Light and Power Committee FROM: Richard E. Matzke7€27•c SUBJECT: Proposed Emergency Generator Peak Shaving Rebate Program The Light and Power Department has identified a number of our customers which have permanently installed emergency generation equipment. We are proposing a trial program to provide a financial incentive to two customers with larger generation capacities to operate their equipment during peak loading times. The purpose of this program is to reduce the Town's system load coincident with Platte River's system peak. The attached page outlines the details of the proposed rebate program. The Light and Power Department is proposing to pay $10 per kW of load carried by the emergency generators during requested operating periods for the months of December, January, and February. The Department's cost from Platte River of load that only appears during our coincident seasonal peak is $64.48 per kW. If we request that customers operate their generators during each of the three months, then the Light and Power Department's cost per kW would be $30, for load offset by customer owned generation. The estimated cost of the program includes $2,000 for purchase of a notebook computer which will allow meter department personnel to electronically download the load profile information from our metering equipment. This purchase would eliminate the need for the $2,500 laptop computer requested in the 1995 budget. The estimated cost to install metering equipment at two locations is $4,000. The rebate amounts for three months if the monthly load offset was 200 kW would be $6,000. The benefit on our purchase power cost would be approximately $13,000. It is very likely that this program would pay for itself the first year with benefits extending into future years as long as the program is continued. The Light and Power Department recommends that the Emergency Generator Peak Shaving Rebate Program be authorized for the 1994- 1995 winter season with equipment and installation costs not to exceed $6,000 and a rebate amount of $10 per kW as described on the attached page. REM 2-1
f . 1 . Estes Park Light and Power Department Emergency Generator Peak Shaving Rebate Program-Draft 1. Light and Power Department will pay cost of required metering f equipment. 2. Rebate amount will be the greater amount of $10 per kilowatt of load carried by the generator during the Platte River System peak hour or $10 per kilowatt of the average load carried by the generator during hours of operation requested by the Light and Power Department. 3. Customer will be requested to operate no more than six times each month of December, January, and February and no more than ' four hours per occurrence. Light and Power Department will attempt to provide 12 hours of notice prior to requested I generation period. 2-2 November 9, 1994
. TOWN OF ESTES PARK November 9, 1994 OFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Light and Power Committee FROM: Richard E. Matzke-~~3'5*- SUBJECT: Electric Extension to Rocky Mountain National Park The Light and Power Department is nearing a point in negotiations with the Park Service, the Bureau of Reclamation, and Platte River Power Authority that we will need to bring some items to the Town Board for approval. The Department is reviewing a draft contract authorizing the Light and Power Department or its contractor to build improvements to the Park's electrical system to meet Town requirements. The scope of construction and cost are still being refined. The Town will need to develop rates for administrative loads in the Park which includes delivery costs from Platte River and the Town. An agreement will need to be reached between Platte River and the Town for a method of providing credit to the Town for energy consumed by the Park's administrative loads. REM
f 1 11 It 11 1 i b .r c) .' 1 .1, 1 mococor-1- Irll r-I thi 01 1 00.r N r- Im 1 0•Ne,ulmm lyl 01 to I Ull 01 er-MH 101 OONMMNIVI U-1 1 1- 1 .-1 1 mil . . ..1 -1 .1 -1 -1 .1 W E--1 1 O rt lo m INI 1-O00LDMOILAI CO I C' 1 Ul 1 Ch, 1 1 rh|~ C,m 1 0, 1 e.trnmoc,Al W I N toi b I IlA I MN,DNM 1 0' 1 W 1 -1 01 1 . 1 ..1 - 1 -1 1 1 -1 1 .r I.rl N Iml It 4 1 144 It 11 11 I 1 11 11 11 1 1 -It It It I 1 Ln /O CO O 110 1 mencor-m INI m I N I Vt I hui O INI W NOOMMI I N 1 0 1 U-11 b 1 O 1 MON 1 00 1 CONOMMIY I W I M 1 00 1 = 1 m I I -- - 1 -1 . . . . ..1 .1 -1 -1 -1 mE-1 I tr, my Illl. 1 Nlot-1.110·,NIMI - 1 W I mI 01'Im - 10,1 Ch N 1- N ul 1 00 1 '-It , 0, 1 rIE 1 9 1.1 1 . 1 It 1 1 1 ta 11 11 11 1 1 It It 11 1 1 11 11 11 1 41. 1 It It 11 1 ILD Ch "70101 MN.-14•r-100 I col r-1 I gl MI too /0 1 col h ~ Ul m CO in I M 1 00 1 •7 1 -1 1 rt W LO 1 toi r- e co ci mrn I rn 1 1-1 1 .-1 1 Ul I 01 1 .1 .. . .1 .1 -1 .1 -1 91• 1 1 C·•r\IN I M I .-11.neat.Olnltrll 0 1 N I t- 1 cle I Mloc, 101 mmoot- 0 IN 1 1- 1 •-It m I 0111" I lot YNVINY 101 WINI MI r-1 >4 1 - 1 .1 . 1 .1 It -1 1 " 1 el 1 ./ 1 1 1 4 1 I r - It It It I 1 11 It 11 1 1 It 11 11 1 MEN A,[z.WE 1 It 11 11 1 ul B:ME# 1 r--1 Q C' 1 1- 1 t.0 tO t.0 NOON I .-11 inIMI to I INNC,Otml Ym •1· N A mi rf I m I Ch i m 1 W W E-1 Al O 1 eloob 11- 1 M w U) m c~ in 1 Ul 1 Nit-1 MI E-134 W -r! 1 - .. 1 -1 .... 1 .1 -1 -1 . 1 u}OE-lu} ch E--1 / co r--1 C~ 1 Ch I hoot-COLD 1 01 1 O I LD I %60 1 W El, Ul 011 100 , Ch I rl• 01 CO m LA 1 ul 1 97 1 LA I •-1 1 0 ,-lEi 7 1"1 N 1 4. 1 1 1 In I t141•3WZ 1 0 It 111 O EH !1 111 900 1 li 1 11 1 Z.WOZ COZW O 1-11-1 64 4 0 3= 61 1 It lilli z loomotel m O U, O V O I N 1 1-1 t o I Ml 0 1 '0000 1 H KOq·Nulul Imt 1-1 1 Ul 1 00 1 2 4-1 I r-!Ult- 1 9 1 .-I OU-11.AHLD IMI •-1 tull 00 1 1 -1 . . . . ..1 -1 .1 .1 -1 W al ty, I Ch O 1,0 1 lo I -00,0,1-m 19•/ N tool MI ! e plij 10 -1 INI LONOOmt- , aol VIMI MI 0·01[-1-rn 1001 1-000-,loor-4 I e I 4'tool MI mt - 1.1 - 1.1 1 1 .1 0 1 to 1,0 1 m 11-nl 1 1 CO I O 144 11 It 'It A 1 11 lilli 1/} We ¢ D 1-1 W 11 •r·1 , 8 1 R X 0 W >1 41 A C A 04 1 al . 04 0 . g CO ·r-1 Uloop ~ •rl K ro U] 014-1 4 1.4 0 HW W C 0 11 KI P U 14 A, 0 U ,-4 0 M !1 51 d) C r-1 0, dj -4 E ·-1 0 U] 01 C) 1-1 10 0 1-1 0 C 1-1 0 WW O 6) H U W P U ·rl (11 5 4 0 +J 0(!)2;title.:J t~~O M M E 04 0 -4 *171( *1 WOOE•-1 WOU)00 0<,-1 M U W 8 8 - O W 4a--11. s C:Lyto Itxj~I~~II:al: ssagxs *88'9IS$ ISE'I$ LEO'L9E$ (IB*'9Ii) (6 EV'9t'$) Sm<fl:LIGN ER 30, 1994 & 1993 S3 IaN3dX3 UY'JOX vernmental Revenue for Services TOTAL REVENUE Transfers Out ion/General SanNEA32 30 (ADNEID aneous urre
MM IN31SAS 4a-2 LOADHIST.XLS 11/8/94 -0-1992 15,000 -0-1993 *66L-1/*,- 000 AoN PO des Bnv Inr unr Xe'Al Jdv Jevy qad uer TOWN OF ESTES PARK PURCHASE POWER-DEMAND 19,000 18,000 17,000 16,000 000'*L 000'EX 000'ZL 000'LK
- 00 - CD $ LO -(9 N (M)l) 0901 W31SAS 4a-3 11 /8 /94 9 10/17/94 A 10/17/94 -··AVERAGE ESTES PARK LIGHT AND POWER DEPARTMENT 14,000 ~A 13,910 DZ EZ ZE LE OZ 61 81 LL 9L GL D L EL ZL L L 01 6 DAILY LOAD CURVES 9NI0N3 BnOH OCT94LD.XLS 13,000 10,000 000'6 000'8 000'L 000'9
r f 1 1 - - ~- ~ : --: »- - > I@ 31 - iff·f 1 1 1 , 1 1 . 1 11,1.1 111.... 1.1 1:1 1 1 1 t t 0 1 1 - 1 In lilli It 1 1 1 HMM A1H1NOW 4a-4 LOADHIST.XLS 11 /3 /94 01992 5,000,000 - - - · - - - 01993 000 AON PO das Bnv Inr unr Xevy Jdv JeIN qa=1 uer MONTHLY ENERGY PURCHASES 10,000,000 9,000,000 8,000,000 7,000,000 - 6,000,000 - - -- 000'000'* - - - - - 000'000'£ -- 000'000' L - -- 000'0002 *66 L m
. f i 1 itt % 1 1 C co 0 1 . 1 1 1 1 1 1 03SVHOWnd HMM 01* 4a-5 LOADHIST.XLS 11 /8 /94 m 1992 £66 L 0 -- ~ -~" ~" 000'000'09 *66 1 0 000 AoN PO daS Bnv Inr unr AeIN Jdv J evy qa=1 1994 YTD VS 1993 YEAR TO DATE ENERGY PURCHASES 100,000,000 90,000,000 80,000,000 --- " ~~ ~ - ""~ - ~ " - ~ - 000'000'0£ - - 000'000'01 70,000,000 60,000,000 ··· ······· ·· ··· · ·· ·· · ···· ···· ······ ····· I.....I .- Ill-- 000'000'0, - " 000'000»
limi~#pm"/0~ 1 1 - £ 7 I 1 ($) 93-IVS A-IH-1-NOW 4a-6 SALEHIST.XLS 11 /9/94 / 1992 450,000 = ¤ 1993 466 K m 000 AoN PO des Bnv unr ABIAI Jdv JeIN qa=1 uer ··· 000'00£ ESTES PARK LIGHT AND POWER DEPARTMENT ELECTRIC SALES BY MONTH 600,000 550,000 - 500,000 - - 000'09£
1 U |~B~%2*fEER#@Nlf*§Et***1*f90*:*%1&ER@*a@**1*¥25=81. 0 -ip"imMRMA#.Elrf**3jMN#"AMANN' 'E~.: EE::1~..11:1:::. 1 ::1 1 .:i: : : . :. .1.1:. 1 .1 Hai t u.1 d CD 'C=3 c CO 0 1,1 lilli 1,1,11 1,1 . 11 1 1 1 1 ($) 931¥9 31¥0 01 hIV3A 4a-7 SALEHIST.XLS 11 /9 /94 /1992 3,000,000 -- 01993 *66 L m oaa AoN des 6nv inr unr XeIN Jdv JeIN ESTES PARK LIGHT AND POWER DEPARTMENT 0.23% 1994 YTD VS 1993 TO DATE ELECTRIC SALES 6,000,000 5,000,000 4,000,000 000'000'Z - - 000'000' L
SENT BY: 9- 9-94 ; 15:00 ; CAMBRIDGE REPORTS-• 303 586 6909; # 2/ 5 r CAMBRIDGE REFOR[S 1~ RESEARCH INTERNATIONAL 955 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139 Phone: 617·661·0110 Fax: 617-661-3575 September 9,1994 MEMORANDUM TO: Platte River Power Authority (PRPA) FR: Earl Taylor and Bruce Bogle Cambndge Reports/Research International RE: Comparison of resource planning research results from four city-owned utilities This memorandum presents a brief comparison of the Platte River resource planning research results from Estes Park, Fort Collins, Longinont, and Loveland. Note that the comparisons arebased on the results for each single city-owned utility, in turn, compared to the other three cities combined. Thus, due to the small number of interviews performed in Estes Park, differences between Estes Park and the other three cities may be nominalk quite large yet not atati#IQUY significant to a reliable extent. Basic attitude measures Most broadly, basic attitudes toward the city-owned utilities are the most positive in Estes Park and Fort Collins, somewhat less so in Loveland, and least positive in Longmont. Commercial customers in Longmont give the only mean ratings that fall below the neutral point-Le., 4.0 on the scale of "1" to '7"-in the areas of perceived concern for customers (mean rating of 3.83) and believability 0.87). • Estes Park residential customers give the highest ratings among the four cities for overall favorabilitv (6.20), concern for customers (6.00), and believability (5.80), but the fowest ratings for fairness of rates (4.00); • Fort Collins residential ratings are most positive on fairness of rates (4.95), and second to Estes Park on the oiher three measures; • Commercial ratings from Fort Collins customers are the strongest of the four cities in aIl four categories: overall favorability (5.55); believability (5.03); fairness of rates (5.01); and concern for customers (4.83); Cambridge Ripmt,/Ria-ch M,fnmlonal 41>-1 ...
- SEP 09 '94 16:20 CAMBRIDGE REPORTS 1-617-661-0110 P.2 I , Memorandum to Platte River Power Authority September 9, 1994 Page 2 • Lone]nom trails the other three cities on all four commercial measures andlwo of the four residential measures. The following table presents these comparisons. Figures in bold indicate that the figure given for one city is higher to a statistically significant extent than the corresponding figure for the other three cities combined, while italic figures are significantly lower in the same way. These significance tests are based in large part on the number of observations involved; thus, while Estes Park has the highest neminal overall favorability among residential customers (620), this difference fails to achieve statistical significance because of the small number of interviews in Estes Park By contrast, while Fort Collins (5.43) is nominally second to Estes Park in this same measure, enough interviews were conducted in Fort Collins to yield a statistically signiflcant difference from the other three cities combined. (In this case, the higher figure in Estes Park is subsumed by the I lower figures in Loveland and Longmont, where more interviews were conducted.) 110•10 attltud, compartion lowanl four cltrowned uttlitle• (Moan scorea) 881*80#£1&"BEWN* ! 0..1 p.* Comn' Longlmon: Lovol- Overall favorability 6.27 820 .A. 5.14 4.98 Perceived faimees of rate• .4.81 4.00 4.96 4.67 4.73 Bellevabllity 4.77 6.80 4.87 4.60 4.70 Perceived concern for customers 4.66 elm 485 4.37 4.62 999/oaxid~gammall Overall favorabllity 5.29 6.21 5.56 5.06 6.10 Perceived film- of rates 4.67 463 6.01 4.15 4.60 Believability 4.86 4.83 5.02 3.87 4.66 Pircelved concern for customer, 4.61 4.63 4.. 3.83 4.48 Combildge Reporteme-argh trit,mational 41,-2 1
OON 1 01 · 0- 0-04 , la·UZ i Lal,JD!\ 11.ULL rUIVA 1 3- JUJ DOO OQUa,# 4/ 0 ./ b: Memorandum to Platte River Power Authority September 9, 1994 Page 3 Specific performance evaluations Largely the same patterns hold true in residential and commercial customers' specific performance evaluations of the four city-owned utilities. Again, bold figures in the table below are significantly higher, while italicized figures are significantly lower. • Estes Park residential ratings are again highest in all areas except one- in this case, economic development, or attracting jobs and businesses- where the dty is tied for lowest • Residential ratings in Fort Collins again generally come in second to Estes Park, and are highest for economic development • Longment again trails the pack in most specific performance evaluations among both residential and commercial customers; • Fort Collins commercial ratings trail Estes Park in traditional service . areas such as service restoration and helpful employees. However, perhaps due to a higher level of information or publicity about IRF- relatea issues in Fort Collins, commercial ratings for resource planning areas such as futureplanning, efficiency programs, and keeping rates low are all stronger in the larger dty. K/ 4b-3 Cambridge Report,/Re-rch Intorn~tional
00,1 pi . O- O-01 , lU·UZ i LAHDA I LAID SUIVIi I J- duo 000 00Ua, * 0/ 0 'Memorandum to Platte River Power Authority September 9,1994 Page 4 Performance ovaluation comparlion for four clty-own•d utlittle, (Mean scorea) Fon 0-li p.,1 Col./ L.m- Le'lind Quick restoration 5.65 8.80 5,51 5.48 5.62 Helpful employee• 5.40 820 5.45 6.38 5.25 Keeping pubic 11•onned 4.90 6.20 GIl 453 4.97 Nol harming the environment 488 5.60 4.96 4.75 4.82 Emclency provarns 4.17 5.20 5.18 4.47 4.52 Fldure planning 4.58 600 4.73 427 4.54 Keepk,g rates low 429 5.40 445 4.06 4.13 Economic development 4.16 4.00 4.34 4.01 4.00 e=,=9==M! Quick r-toration 551 024 5.62 6.33 5.37 H®fli enployeall 5.40 8.11 5.51 5.04 6.33 Not harming the enviro,¥nent 4.81 5.19 5.06 4.54 4.88 Efficlency programs 4.71 3.88 5.12 3.77 5.09 RNre pknning 4.69 4.87 473 4.05 4.70 Keeping public Informed 4.07 4.61 4.85 3.87 5.02 . Keeping rates low 4.18 4.37 4A: 9.62 424 Eoonomic development 3.56 2.62 8.66 200 4- 4b-4 Cambrldgi Roport/F•-rvt, 1,~,rmtional