Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutEnergy Board - Minutes - 02/09/2017Energy Board Minutes February 9, 2017 1 Energy Board Minutes February 9, 2017 Fort Collins Utilities Energy Board Minutes Thursday, February 9, 2017 Energy Board Chairperson City Council Liaison Pete O’Neill, 970-223-8703 Ross Cunniff, 970-420-7398 Energy Board Vice Chairperson Staff Liaison Nick Michell, 970-215-9235 Tim McCollough, 970-305-1069 Roll Call Board Present: Chairperson Pete O’Neill, Vice Chairperson Nick Michell, Alan Braslau, Bill Becker, Greg Behm, Margaret Moore, Stacey Baumgarn, Phil Friedman Late Arrivals: None Board Absent: Lori Nitzel Others Present Staff: Tim McCollough, Christie Fredrickson, John Phelan, Cyril Vidergar, Kim DeVoe, Rhonda Gatzke PRPA: Paul Davis, Brad Decker, Jason Frisbie Members of the Public: Jim Browne Meeting Convened Chairperson Pete O’Neill called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. Announcements and Agenda Changes The Efficiency Works Moves Neighborhood Pilot will be presented after Staff Reports. John Phelan will briefly address Community Solar Garden Performance Requirements as part of the Staff Reports agenda item. Public Comment None Approval of January 12, 2017 Board Meeting Minutes Amendments to the January 12, 2017 minutes were made by the Board Members and the minutes were accepted as amended. Staff Reports Light & Power Dashboard Tim McCollough, Light & Power Operations Manager (attachments available upon request) Mr. McCollough provided a routine update on the Utility’s reliability metrics: SAIDI (System Average Interruption Duration Index), SAIFI (System Average Interruption Frequency Index), and CAIDI (Customer Average Interruption Duration Index). SAIDI measures the average outage duration for each customer served; SAIFI measures the average number of interruptions that a customer experiences (of any length); CAIDI measures average restoration time. Energy Board Minutes February 9, 2017 2 Energy Board Minutes February 9, 2017 SAIDI is averaged on a quarterly basis, and looked at annually. The Utility has sustained a strong performance over the last three quarters, all outages averaging less than 20 minutes. This is partly due to older and longer outages falling off the 12-month rolling average, as well as the seasonality of load. Any outage duration of less than 20 minutes is considered very good in the industry; the nationwide average is about 120 minutes. The Utility has not had any significant events in the last three quarters and Mr. McCollough attributes that in part to planning for outages rather than waiting for equipment to fail. SAIFI is also averaged on a quarterly basis, and looked at annually. Many of the Utility’s outages in the last 12 months have affected large groups of people, even if they were only short term outages, and that has driven up the average over the last three quarters to .38, .45 and .42 interruptions, respectively. The SAIFI goal in the City’s Energy policy is .45 interruptions. Finally, Mr. McCollough introduced the CAIDI metric to the Board, which is also averaged quarterly and looked at annually. Currently when a Fort Collins Utilities customer experiences an outage, on average it will last less than one hour; this is approximately half the national average. Board members inquired if there is a difference between residential and commercial customers. Mr. McCollough explained these numbers are more representative of residential customers because commercial customers only represent one customer, even if an outage affects a very large load or many people in one building. Board member Becker asked how the Utility collects this data. Mr. McCollough said these numbers are calculated from a manual data collection report that is filled out after each outage. Board members also asked if there is any other data on the dashboard they could see, and Mr. McCollough asked what information the board is interested in seeing. Chairperson O’Neill said he’d be interested in seeing data related to energy usage by customer or class, a measure of need for capacity expansion or feeder loading, as well as carbon intensity Solar Garden Business Model Update John Phelan, Energy Services Manager (no attachments) Mr. Phelan advised this item was not listed on the agenda, but Vice Chairperson Michell requested a brief overview on the business model and performance requirements for the Riverside Community Solar Garden located in Fort Collins, the City’s first and only solar garden. The solar garden had two significant outages in the first 18 months of operation; both left the array offline for more than a month. Mr. Phelan explained that the City’s agreement with the Clean Energy Collective (CEC) is related to the site, the acceptance and delivery of the power from the array to the distribution grid, and to provide a virtual net-metering credit onto customers’ bills. The agreement between the CEC and the customer is related the ownership of that asset. The performance element is embedded within the customer’s agreement with CEC rather than the City. The City does have some performance requirements with the CEC with regards to maintenance of the site, but not related to the solar. Chairperson O’Neill asked if the City had any say in what the performance requirements would look like within the customer agreement, and Mr. Phelan advised that they did try, but ultimately were not successful in that aspect. He also said the market for Community Solar has changed drastically since the initialization of this project, so as the City looks at a new round of Community Solar they hope to gain feedback and learn from the structure of this project. Board members agreed that the City should set and review performance objectives before there is another contract in place for future community solar plans and they look forward to hear more about future plans. Energy Board Minutes February 9, 2017 3 Energy Board Minutes February 9, 2017 Process for Energy Board Requesting Expanded Duties & Functions Cyril Vidergar, Assistant City Attorney Tim McCollough, Light & Power Operations Manager (attachments available upon request) The Energy Board’s 2017 Workplan was reviewed and approved by their Council liaison, Ross Cunniff, without any additional comments. Per the 2017 Workplan, the Board would like to expand their charter to include engagement in educational activities and regional collaboration. Mr. Vidergar advised the next step for the Board is to draft a memo to their Council liaison seeking Council either action or direction, per the City Code. The two paths are: (Action) codified expansion of the Board’s official duties by Council ordinance (Sec. 2‐233 (8), FCMC), or (Direction) direct request by City Council or City Manager for the Board to engage in specific policy or program work on a case‐by‐case basis (Sec. 2‐75, FCMC). The Board should discuss which path they would like to go and then send a formal request to City Council. Chairperson O’Neill said his goal is to support existing policies, and he would like this to be codified in the Board’s official duties. Board member Moore asked if either one would be a shorter path to resolution. Mr. Vidergar advised regardless of what path the Board chooses, both will most likely require some discussion with Council. He reiterated that Council did have some concern after the Board’s joint meeting with the City of Loveland, because Boards and Commissions were designed to be advisory boards strictly to serve City Council, not to be discussing issues with others (unless directed by Council). Mr. Vidergar also suggested that requesting case by case permissions under an existing code section might be easier, and could stay on the Council consent agenda. Board member Baumgarn asked if there is flexibility between the path choices, more specifically if the Board would be limited to their abilities if they elect the first path by codifying their duties. Chairperson O’Neill clarified that anything not included in their Workplan would technically require them to seek approval from Council anyway, so he’s advocating to permanently change their charter. The Board seems to agree that a codified expansion of Board’s official duties by council ordinance is the preferred path and would like to add this as a decision item at the Board’s next meeting; Chairperson O’Neill will begin drafting a memo for the Board to vote on. (6:45) Efficiency Works Neighborhood Pilot Kim DeVoe, Energy Services Engineer (attachments available upon request) The City launched the Home Efficiency Program in 2010 to increase savings in single family homes. The program focused on health, safety and comfort, as well as energy and water usage by completing comprehensive energy efficiency audits. The City identified several best practices and areas for improvement within the program: Some customers felt the process was too long and time consuming, there were cost barriers, and some decisions were too complex. In spite of those hurdles, the program was still one of the best performing in the country. Later, the City developed a Phase II, known as the Efficiency Works Neighborhood (EW-N) Pilot, which features home performance upgrades as part of a streamlined package for homeowners in select neighborhoods. Customers still complete a home efficiency audit; inspecting insulation and windows, the furnace and ductwork and common areas known for air leaks. The home’s specific needs will determine three package options for the customer: Good, Better and Best. The customer can select a customizable package, built with standardized pricing, which matches their lifestyle and budget. Customers also have the choice to utilize an on-bill financing option of Energy Board Minutes February 9, 2017 4 Energy Board Minutes February 9, 2017 up to $25,000.00. Efficiency Works will provide a qualified, quality-assured contractor to complete the upgrades; and later, they will ensure the completion and quality of all upgrades. The City wanted to reach a stronger audience for the program, so they developed a propensity score based customer demographics, such as usage, neighborhoods and assessor’s data. They took that information and developed a targeted marketing plan to try and reach customers who were most likely participate and who had the greatest opportunity for savings. Program participation isn’t limited to only the targeted neighborhoods, but all homes are required to meet an age-of-home criteria. They were able to reach twice as many customers per area compared to the traditional audit program. Additionally, 52% of customers chose the “best” package and 64% of projects used on bill financing. Board member Braslau commented that some of the standardized recommendations are still being included in homes where they may not be applicable, such as changing the furnace filter in a home that only has a boiler. Mr. DeVoe thanked Mr. Braslau for bringing that to his attention and it’s something that he can address within the language library; he doesn’t want a customer to view that and assume that the audit wasn’t thoroughly completed. Board members asked if the contractors within the program like the structure, Mr. DeVoe explained that the Contractors are bought in because it keeps their work steady. Going forward, Efficiency Works will be available regionally through PRPA (as Efficiency Works Homes) in Loveland, Longmont and Estes Park. They’ll also begin issuing an Energy Performance Improvement Certificate (EPIC), which is collaboration between Fort Collins Utilities, CLEAResult, the Colorado Energy Office, the Department of Energy, the Appraisal Institute and the Multiple Listing Service, to give instant value to the completed projects. The certificate will list all completed measures and provide the home energy score. Board member Behm asked what the customer is typically most motivated by, such as savings or comfort. Mr. DeVoe explained they try to appeal to different things depending on the customer’s stated interests and demographics, because their motivations are going to vary. Board member Moore asked if her home can is able to obtain the EPIC certificate now, since her work was completed before outside of the pilot program, and Mr. DeVoe said that is his goal in the future once the data points are collected. Vice Chairperson Michell asked when the full program will roll out to the whole City, and Mr. Phelan clarified Efficiency Works Neighborhoods is live as of January. PRPA Customized Resource Portfolio Project Update Brad Decker, Strategic Planning Manager, PRPA (attachments available upon request) The Customized Resource Plan (CRP) is a Platte River Board of Directors approved project, and a joint charter was formed and signed in May 2016 by the four cities. Fort Collins, Loveland, Longmont and Estes Park have each expressed interest in having specific types of generation to serve their customers, and each municipality has their own distinct long-term goals. The overall goal of the CRP project is to develop a range of alternatives, provide sound advice and to support the paths the municipalities can consider. There are two phases in CRP planning process. In 2017, Phase 1 planning includes the initial modeling to establish cost landscape of potential customized resource plans. Then a subset of the most effective plans will be chosen for further analysis. Platte River hopes to adhere to the following schedule for Phase 1: Initial modeling and internal review (February – May), presentation of initial results (June), revised modeling on portfolios of interest and sensitivities (July – September), presentation of final results Energy Board Minutes February 9, 2017 5 Energy Board Minutes February 9, 2017 (October), and decision on next steps (December). Phase 2 will begin in 2018, and if customized resource plans look attractive, new programs and business structures to facilitate CRP implementation will be develop and deployed. Platte River will begin with a Base Case derived from the current budget model, and given the uncertainty for the future of carbon legislation, scenarios will be constructed with and without carbon assumptions. Platte River currently assumes some limits on the volume of energy exports and selected scenarios will test the impact of that assumption on the modeling. Finally, all incremental costs (system costs above the Base Case) will be assigned to the specific municipal sponsor. Some high-level assumptions that Platte River has accounted for include the retirement of Craig Unit 1 in 2025, Craig Unit 2 retirement in 2029, Rawhide retirement in 2046, and additional wind power to meet the Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS). Vice Chairperson Michell asked if the election results have any impact on Platte River’s plans to retire Craig Unit 1. Mr. Frisbie advised that the plans have not changed and Platte River is committed moving forward with retirement of that unit. Mr. Decker also explained that the U.S. has already made so many investments with wind and other renewable resources that many of the 2030 objections in the Clean Power Plan are close to being met. Because of that, Platte River feels comfortable that many of their assumptions in the CRP plan are a good baseline. Platte River will develop cost estimates for a wide range of renewable energy portfolios. Phase 1 models a base case, and then has tiers of wind and solar megawatts, as well as a combined option of the two. Vice Chairperson Michell asked if this plan would be easier or harder to achieve if Platte River was included in a regional market, does it get easier to manage if the market for renewable loads is larger? Mr. Decker explained that participation in an organized market could present planning uncertainties as well was operational opportunities. It could drive costs down, and provide access to a broader base of resources, but there are many unknown factors at this time that are difficult to plan for. Mr. McCollough added one financial risk in a regional market is that high penetrations of renewables can introduce severe price volatility. Assuming Platte River completes Phase 1 by the end of 2017; Phase 2 will begin the conceptual program design as well as develop the administration. Custom programs are treated through rate allocations and directly assigned charges; transfer payments are evaluated through system planning model simulations and it will require periodic rate true-ups and compensatory adjustments. The next steps include Platte River’s exploration in joining an organized market; negotiations are currently underway with the Southwest Power Pool. Board member Friedman asked about the retirement replacements for Craig 2 and Rawhide. Mr. Decker said most likely combined cycle gas units. Board member Baumgarn asked if a CRP would be necessary if all four cities wanted the same thing, and if the Utility (or any other city) has been explicit about what they want. Mr. Frisbie said he’s not so sure all the cities don’t want the same thing, but at this point many of them are asking questions and want to see data to make an informed decision. Mr. Decker explained that all the municipalities have stated their goals to Platte River, and would like Platte River to make those recommendations. Mr. Frisbie added that as a group the cities want to diversify their portfolios, but with regards to how fast or what extent, each community wants to see the modeling first. Solar Affordability Program & Rate Ordinance John Phelan, Energy Services Manager Energy Board Minutes February 9, 2017 6 Energy Board Minutes February 9, 2017 (attachments available upon request) The Solar Affordability Program (SAP) is an income qualified solar program providing both a bill benefit (taking solar production and providing that benefit to a limited number of customers) as well as efficiency benefits to those eligible income qualified customers. The 64 kilowatt solar system is installed on a City warehouse on Loomis Street. The project was completed with funding from the Fort Collins Utilities 2015/2016 budget, the Colorado Energy Office (CEO) as well as contributions from GRID alternatives and local volunteers. There wasn’t any funding that came from the CEO that was given to the City of Fort Collins; rather, the CEO solicited vendors for a statewide pilot program and GRID Alternatives was selected. GRID then installed the solar system at a lower cost for the City because the Energy Office provided the funding to them up front. The Solar array will accrue 20-25 customers annually, and those customers will rotate out after a one year period, and a new pool of qualified customers will take over. The bill benefits are linked to a structured approach to efficiency and conservation, by essentially offering a (roughly) 50% discount on the user’s electricity bill for one year, in exchange for a commitment to work through a structured efficiency and conservation approach that the City hopes will permanently reduce their electricity use. The customer eligibility is tied to the Low Income Energy Assistance Program (LEAP). LEAP has an annual income qualification process, and in the case of Fort Collins, they are providing heating assistance. All customers in this program are Fort Collins electric heat customers, who are income qualified. Board members inquired if the program participants have any direct finical cost to them and Mr. Phelan clarified that they do not have any financial cost. He elaborated with a slide displaying a process map of the customer outreach and selection process and the program cycle. The City receives the LEAP information, and then they begin a targeted outreach program to recruit potential program participants. After the candidates are selected and integrated into the SAP, the solar credits are applied to their bill (on a monthly basis) and participants are engaged in education and efficiency installations for the program cycle. The proposed rate ordinance defines the beneficial and physical ownership models for community solar, as well as subscription based or dedicated program-managed projects for community solar. The ordinance also allows community solar to be located in Fort Collins Utilities or Platte River territory and ownership by Fort Collins Utilities or Platte River, or a third party. And finally, the ordinance applies current virtual net metering rates to all system types. Board member Behm moved to recommend Council adopt the ordinance to amend Chapter 26 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins related to customer participation in community solar, including the Solar Affordability Program, on first reading February 21, 2017. Board member Braslau seconded the motion. Discussion of the Motion: Board members commented that this is great program providing motivation to conserve, not just use renewable energy. Vice Chairperson Michell asked why the language for community solar needs to be changed, as opposed to calling the program an Assistance Program. He doesn’t believe the SAP is classified as community solar when the City is providing a one year subscription. Mr. Phelan explained that in this case, community solar is a single resource that is shared amongst multiple customers. Board member Baumgarn said it’s brilliant to tie a conservation consideration to solar, and he would like to see more programs like this one, with an expectation that anyone who receives a solar rebate from the City should also be receiving continued conservation education. Energy Board Minutes February 9, 2017 7 Energy Board Minutes February 9, 2017 Vote on the Motion: It passed unanimously, 8-0, with 1 absent Board Member Reports Chairperson O’Neill advised he looked into term lengths and he was told by the City Attorney’s Office that full terms are defined by what they were at the inception of the board member, so even if the term was only two years at that time, it’s still considered a full term. They do have the option to reapply at the end of their term and request City Council review for a possible exception because of the unique situation. The National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners released a 56-page manual recently. Mr. O’Neill will email it to the Board to review. Board member Baumgarn mentioned that CSU’s president signed a pledge to be 100% renewable electricity by 2030, which ties in very nicely with the City’s goals. 4000 students signed a petition, which made it the most successful petition drive ever on the CSU campus. Future Agenda Review February 23 will be a special session in conjunction with the work session to line up with a council deadline. Mr. McCollough advised the March meeting will be influx, but the major topic will be TOU. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 9:07 p.m. Approved by the Energy Board on March 9, 2017 ________________________________ ______________ Board Secretary, Christie Fredrickson Date 3/17/2017