DOCSLIB.ORG

Testimony of Cynthia M. Armstrong Has Been Served Upon the Following Parties of Record in the Captioned Proceeding by Electronic Service on June 28, 2021

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Testimony of Cynthia M. Armstrong Has Been Served Upon the Following Parties of Record in the Captioned Proceeding by Electronic Service on June 28, 2021 STATE OF INDIANA INDIANA UTILITY REGULATORY COMMISSION VERIFIED PETITION OF INDIANAPOLIS POWER & ) LIGHT COMPANY D/B/A/ AES INDIANA FOR ) APPROVALS AND COST RECOVERY ASSOCIATED ) WITH THE RETIREMENT OF PETERSBURG UNITS 1 ) AND 2, INCLUDING: (1) APPROVAL OF IPL’S ) CREATION OF REGULATORY ASSETS FOR THE ) NET BOOK VALUE OF PETERSBURG UNITS 1 AND 2 ) CAUSE NO. 45502 UPON RETIREMENT; (2) AMORTIZATION OF THE ) REGULATORY ASSETS BASED UPON THE ) COMPANY’S DEPRECIATION RATES; AND (3) ) RECOVERY OF THE REGULATORY ASSETS ) THROUGH INCLUSION IN AES INDIANA’S RATE ) BASE AND ONGOING AMORTIZATION IN AES ) INDIANA’S FUTURE RATE CASES. ) INDIANA OFFICE OF UTILITY CONSUMER COUNSELOR TESTIMONY OF CYNTHIA M. ARMSTRONG - PUBLIC’S EXHIBIT NO. 2 JUNE 28, 2021 Respectfully submitted, Lorraine Hitz Attorney No. 18006-29 Deputy Consumer Counselor Public’s Exhibit No. 2 Cause No. 45502 Page 1 of 15 TESTIMONY OF OUCC WITNESS CYNTHIA M. ARMSTRONG CAUSE NO. 45502 INDIANAPOLIS POWER & LIGHT COMPANY D/B/A AES INDIANA I. INTRODUCTION 1 Q: Please state your name and business address. 2 A: My name is Cynthia M. Armstrong, and my business address is 115 W. Washington 3 St., Suite 1500 South, Indianapolis, IN, 46204. 4 Q: By whom are you employed and in what capacity? 5 A: I am employed as a Senior Utility Analyst in the Electric Division for the Indiana 6 Office of Utility Consumer Counselor (“OUCC”). A summary of my qualifications 7 can be found in Appendix A. 8 Q: Briefly summarize Indianapolis Power and Light Company’s request in this 9 proceeding. 10 A: Indianapolis Power and Light Company d/b/a AES Indiana (“IPL” or “AES 11 Indiana”) intends to retire Petersburg Units 1 and 2 in 2021 and 2023, respectively. 12 These dates are much earlier than the estimated retirement dates IPL identified for 13 the Petersburg Generating Station in its last depreciation study in Cause No. 14 45029.1 The updated accelerated retirement dates are based on IPL’s 2019 15 Integrated Resource Plan (“IRP”) Short-Term Action Plan. Due to earlier 16 retirement dates, Petersburg Units 1 and 2 will not be fully depreciated when 17 retired. Therefore, AES Indiana requests authority to create a regulatory asset for 1 The depreciation study in Cause No. 45029 assumed a 2042 retirement date for both Petersburg Units 1 and 2 (Cause No. 45029, Direct Testimony of IPL witness John J. Spanos, JJS Attachment 1, p. 37), and IPL’s 2016 IRP assumed a 2032 retirement date for Petersburg Unit 1 and a 2034 retirement date for Petersburg Unit 2 (IPL’s 2016 IRP, Volume 1, p. 63). Public’s Exhibit No. 2 Cause No. 45502 Page 2 of 15 1 the remaining net book value of Petersburg Units 1 and 2 upon their retirement, 2 amortization of the regulatory assets based on the depreciation rates approved in 3 Cause No. 45029, and to recover the regulatory assets through inclusion in rate base 4 in a future AES Indiana base rate case. 5 Q: What is the purpose of your testimony in this proceeding? 6 A: I discuss the Consent Decree IPL entered into with the U.S. Department of Justice 7 (“DOJ”), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”), and Indiana Department 8 Environmental Management (“IDEM”) to settle alleged New Source Review 9 (“NSR”) and emission violations occurring at the Petersburg Generating Station. I 10 explain how IPL’s past management decisions regarding Petersburg’s operation 11 and compliance with environmental laws have contributed to the current decision 12 to retire Petersburg Units 1 and 2 with a significant investment remaining to be 13 recovered from ratepayers.2 I support OUCC witness Wes R. Blakley’s 14 recommendations regarding AES Indiana’s requested accounting treatment for the 15 early retirement of Petersburg Units 1 and 2. 16 Q: How did you evaluate issues presented in this Cause? 17 A: I reviewed AES Indiana’s verified petition, pre-filed direct testimony, and 18 responses to OUCC discovery requests. I reviewed the Consent Decree, the Notice 19 of Violations (“NOVs”) relevant to the Consent Decree, and other documents 20 relevant to the Consent Decree. I also reviewed past Certificate of Public 21 Convenience and Necessity (“CPCN”) cases where IPL requested Commission 2 Please note that since Indianapolis Power and Light announced its name change to AES Indiana on February 24, 2021, I use both names interchangeably as most of the activities I describe occurred prior to that date. Public’s Exhibit No. 2 Cause No. 45502 Page 3 of 15 1 authority to install pollution control equipment on the Petersburg units to comply 2 with environmental regulations. II. IMPACTS OF THE CONSENT DECREE 3 Q: AES Indiana relies on its 2019 IRP Short-Term Action Plan as the basis for 4 changes in planned retirement dates for Petersburg Units 1 and 2 and its 5 associated request in this case. Is this the only factor contributing to its 6 decision to retire these units earlier than expected? 7 A: No. It is accurate that IPL’s preferred resource portfolio in its 2019 IRP included 8 retiring Peterburg Unit 1 in 2021 and Petersburg Unit 2 in 2023. However, the 9 Consent Decree IPL entered into with the DOJ, EPA, and IDEM to settle claims 10 IPL violated various provisions of the Clean Air Act (“CAA”) also contributes to 11 retiring these units early. Although settlement discussions were continuing with the 12 EPA and IDEM during the 2019 IRP development process, IPL included estimated 13 costs of complying with the Consent Decree in the candidate resource portfolios 14 evaluated in the IRP model.3 While the Consent Decree’s costs were not the sole 15 reason IPL selected the resource portfolio which retires Petersburg Units 1 and 2 16 by 2023, the Consent Decree burdens the Petersburg Generating Station with 17 additional costs should IPL keep these units operational. As the memorandum the 18 DOJ and State of Indiana filed on behalf of the EPA and IDEM in support of the 19 Consent Decree notes, there is no obligation for IPL to follow through with its 20 announced retirements without the Consent Decree.4 21 Q: Please describe the Consent Decree. 3 OUCC Attachment CMA-1, AES Indiana’s Response to OUCC Data Requests 1-8 through 1-11. 4 OUCC Attachment CMA-1. Public’s Exhibit No. 2 Cause No. 45502 Page 4 of 15 1 A: On August 31, 2020, the DOJ, EPA, IDEM, and IPL announced an agreement to 2 settle claims IPL violated NSR, New Source Performance Standards, Indiana’s 3 State Implementation Plan (“SIP”), and its Title V Operating Permit at the 4 Petersburg Generating Station.5 The Consent Decree acknowledges IPL denies the 5 alleged violations but agrees to the Consent Decree’s obligations to avoid litigation 6 costs and uncertainties. 7 The Consent Decree requires IPL to commit to activities at the Petersburg 8 Generating Station to reduce NOx, SO2, sulfuric acid, and particulate matter 9 (“PM”) emissions.6 IPL must take the following actions, including: 10 • Installing Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction (“SNCR”) on Petersburg Unit 11 4 or retiring Petersburg Units 1 and 2 by July 1, 2023. 12 • Continuously operating Selective Catalytic Reduction (“SCR”) systems, 13 other NOx controls, Flue Gas Desulfurization (“FGD”) systems, baghouses, 14 electrostatic precipitators, and sulfuric acid mitigation systems already 15 installed at the facility. 16 • Meeting specified unit emission rates for NOx, SO2, PM, and sulfuric acid 17 emissions by certain dates. These emission rates coincide with any 18 additional pollution controls the Consent Decree requires. 19 • Meeting plantwide annual tonnage emission limits on SO2 and NOx 20 emissions. 21 • Surrendering any excess emission allowances attributable to the compliance 22 activities the Consent Decree requires. 5 U.S. EPA Press Office. (8/31/2020) United States Agrees with Power and Light Company to Resolve Alleged Violations of the Clean Air Act. https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/united-states-agrees-power-and- light-company-resolve-alleged-violations-clean-air-act. 6 United States v. Indianapolis Power & Light Company, Civil Action No. 3:20-cv-202-RLY-MPB. Consent Decree. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2020-09/documents/indianapolispowerlight-cd.pdf Public’s Exhibit No. 2 Cause No. 45502 Page 5 of 15 1 • Completing an environmental mitigation project to construct and operate a 2 3 MW solar facility on the Petersburg site. IPL is not obligated to spend 3 more than $5.0 million on this project. 4 • Spending $325,000 on a state-only environmentally beneficial project 5 involving the acquisition and donation of ecologically-significant land 6 bordering or contiguous to the Patoka National Wildlife Refuge. 7 • Paying a $1.525 million civil penalty. The U.S. will receive $925,000 and 8 the State of Indiana will receive $600,000 of this penalty. 9 Q: Does the Consent Decree allow for alternatives to shutting down Petersburg 10 Units 1 and 2? 11 A: Yes. As mentioned previously, AES Indiana can also comply with the Consent 12 Decree by installing SNCR on Petersburg Unit 4 by July 1, 2023. However, the 13 lead time necessary for IPL to obtain the necessary regulatory approvals, design 14 and construct the project, and complete testing to determine the reagent levels 15 necessary to meet the more stringent Consent Decree NOx limits makes executing 16 this option by July 2023 incredibly difficult. 17 Q: Please summarize the events leading to the Consent Decree. 18 A: OUCC Attachment CMA-2 provides a timeline of events relevant to the Consent 19 Decree. In 2009, the EPA issued an NOV to IPL stating it violated NSR when it 20 failed to obtain Non-attainment New Source Review (“NNSR”) and Prevention of 21 Significant Deterioration pre-construction permits prior to undertaking major 22 replacements and upgrades of equipment at the Eagle Valley, Harding Street, and 23 Petersburg Generating Stations.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • AES Indiana Organizational Chart & Job Descriptions
    OVERVIEW OF THE AES CORPORATION PARENT OF INDIANAPOLIS POWER & LIGHT COMPANY (DBA AES INDIANA) PRESIDENT & CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Chief Chief President Human Resources & General Counsel Financial Operating AES US Internal Communications Officer Officer AES Corporation Operating Units Chief Commercial US Utilities Renewable Operating Officer Operations Energy Physical & AES Indiana AES Ohio Cyber Security This is a partial, functional organization chart of the AES Corporation. It is not a corporate entity chart. Additionally there are other groups that are not shown because they are not involved in merchant power functions, transmission operations, or reliability functions in the United States. Revised: June 25, 2021 Lisa Krueger Exec. VP AES US USS Kristina Lund President AES US Utilities USS Aaron Cooper John Arose Mike Shruba Chief Commercial Officer Generation Complex Leader Vice President US Utilities Indiana T&D Operations USS USS David Jackson Michael L. Holtsclaw Roderick Conwell Director Director Director Regulated Operations Transmission & Distributions Transmission & Distribution USS Operations Engineering Note: USS – Employee of US Services, LLC This is a partial organization chart. There are other groups that report to the President and Vice Presidents that are not shown because they are not involved in merchant power functions, transmission operations, or reliability. Revised: June 25, 2021 AES Indiana Executive Vice President AES US – Responsible for overseeing the operation of all regulated and non-regulated activities in the US President, US Utilities – Responsible for overseeing the operations of the US utilities and the support organizations in Indiana and Ohio. Vice President, Indiana T&D Operations – Responsible for directing the operations related to AES Indiana’s transmission and distribution systems Director, T&D Operations – Responsible for operation and maintenance of the AES Indiana transmission and distribution systems and the associated control centers.
    [Show full text]
  • Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission Electric Utility Reliability Report 2020
    INDIANA UTILITY REGULATORY COMMISSION ELECTRIC UTILITY RELIABILITY REPORT 2020 Each investor-owned electric utility (IOU) in Indiana is required to file a reliability report annually with the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission (IURC or Commission) in compliance with 170 IAC 4-1-23(e). This document serves as a compilation of the reports filed for 2020. This Report includes a graph for each IOU to illustrate the trends in these reliability metrics through 2020 with data starting as early as 2002. The utilities provide the following three reliability indices in their annual reports to the IURC. System Average Interruption Frequency Index (SAIFI): This is the average number of interruptions per customer. It is calculated by dividing the total number of customer interruptions by the total number of customers. System Average Interruption Duration Index (SAIDI): SAIDI is the average minutes of interruption per customer. It is calculated by dividing the sum of all customer interruption durations (in minutes) by the total number of customers. Customer Average Interruption Duration Index (CAIDI): CAIDI is the average duration of interruptions or the time to restore service to interrupted customers. It is calculated by dividing SAIDI by SAIFI. Each utility reports its reliability indices with and without major events (Major Event Days or MEDs). Major events are primarily storms or weather events that are more destructive than normal storm patterns. However, major events may also include ice storms, earthquakes, floods, fires, high winds / tornados, and other disasters. Historically, it is important to note that the same definition of “major event” has not been used by all electric utilities, which makes comparisons with some other utilities more difficult.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Electric Company Investment and Innovation in Energy Storage Leading the Way U.S
    June 2021 Leading the Way U.S. Electric Company Investment and Innovation in Energy Storage Leading the Way U.S. ELECTRIC COMPANY INVESTMENT AND INNOVATION IN ENERGY STORAGE Table of Contents CASE STUDIES CenterPoint Energy (In alphabetical order by holding company) 14 Solar Plus Storage Project AES Corporation Consolidated Edison Company of New York AES Indiana 15 Commercial Battery Storage 1 Harding Street Station Battery (Beyond Behind-the-Meter) Energy Storage System 16 Gateway Center Mall Battery 17 Ozone Park Battery Alliant Energy Dominion Energy 2 Decorah Energy Storage Project 3 Marshalltown Solar Garden and Storage 18 Bath County Pumped Storage Station 4 Sauk City Microgrid 5 Storage System Solar Demonstration Project DTE Energy 6 Wellman Battery Storage 19 EV Fast Charging-Plus-Storage Pilot Ameren Corporation Duke Energy Ameren Illinois 20 Rock Hill Community 9 MW Battery System 7 Thebes Battery Project 21 Camp Atterbury Microgrid 22 Nabb Battery Site Avangrid New York State Electric & Gas Edison International 8 Aggregated Behind-the-Meter Energy Storage Southern California Edison 9 Distribution Circuit Deployed Battery 23 Alamitos Energy Storage Storage System Pilot Project 24 Ice Bear 25 John S. Eastwood Pumped Storage Plant Rochester Gas & Electric Corporation 26 Mira Loma Substation Battery Storage Project 10 Integrated Electric Vehicle Charging & Battery Storage System Green Mountain Power 11 Peak Shaving Pilot Project 27 Essex Solar and Storage Microgrid 28 Ferrisburgh Solar and Storage Microgrid Berkshire Hathaway Energy 29 Milton Solar and Storage Microgrid MidAmerican Energy Company Hawaiian Electric Companies 12 Knoxville Battery Energy Storage System 30 Schofield Hawaii Public Purpose Microgrid PacifiCorp – Rocky Mountain Power 13 Soleil Lofts Virtual Power Plant i Leading the Way U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • 43663 AES in Submission of 2020 Annual Vegetation Management
    STATE OF INDIANA INDIANA UTILITY REGULATORY COMMISSION INVESTIGATION BY THE INDIANA UTILITY ) REGULATORY COMMISSION, UNDER IC §§ ) 8-1-2-58 AND 59, TO INVESTIGATE ) ELECTRIC UTILITY TREE-TRIMMING ) PRACTICES AND TARIFFS RELATING TO ) SERVICE QUALITY IN THE STATE OF ) CAUSE NO. 43663 INDIANA ) ) RESPONDENTS: ) ALL INDIANA JURISDICTIONAL ) ELECTRIC UTILITIES ) PETITIONER’S SUBMISSION OF ANNUAL VEGETATION MANAGEMENT REPORT Indianapolis Power & Light Company d/b/a AES Indiana (“AES Indiana” or “IPL”), by counsel, hereby submits its Annual Vegetation Management Report as required by the Commission’s November 30, 2010, Order in this Cause. This report also includes outage investigation information showing the number of outages caused by vegetation and the text of 170 IAC 4-9, as agreed to in the Stipulation and Settlement Agreement in IPL’s most recent rate case, Cause No. 45029. Respectfully submitted, Jeffrey M. Peabody, Atty No. 28000-53, on behalf of Teresa Morton Nyhart ________________________________ Teresa Morton Nyhart, Atty No. 14044-49 BARNES & THORNBURG LLP 11 South Meridian Street Indianapolis, Indiana 46204 Telephone: (317) 231-7716 Fax: (317) 231-7433 Email: [email protected] Attorney for INDIANAPOLIS POWER & LIGHT COMPANY 2 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned hereby certifies that the foregoing Submission of Annual Vegetation Management Report was served by email transmission, upon the following: Randall C. Helmen Charles W. Ritz III Office of Utility Consumer Counselor Parr Richey Obremskey Frandsen & Suite 1500 South Patterson LLP 115 W. Washington Street 225 W. Main Street Indianapolis, Indiana 46204 P.O. Box 668 Email: [email protected] Lebanon, Indiana 46052 [email protected] Email: [email protected] Kristina Kern Wheeler Randolph G.
    [Show full text]
  • Indiana Office of Utility Consumer Counselor's
    STATE OF INDIANA INDIANA UTILITY REGULATORY COMMISSION VERIFIED JOINT PETITION OF DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, ) LLC, INDIANA GAS COMPANY D/B/A VECTREN ENERGY ) DELIVERY OF INDIANA, INC., INDIANA MICHIGAN POWER ) COMPANY, INDIANA NATURAL GAS CORPORATION, ) INDIANAPOLIS POWER & LIGHT COMPANY, MIDWEST ) NATURAL GAS CORPORATION, NORTHERN INDIANA ) PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY, LLC, OHIO VALLEY GAS ) CORP. AND OHIO VALLEY GAS, INC., SOUTHERN INDIANA ) GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY D/B/A VECTREN ENERGY ) DELIVERY OF INDIANA, INC., AND SYCAMORE GAS ) CAUSE NO. 45377 COMPANY FOR (1) AUTHORITY FOR ALL JOINT ) (Consolidated under PETITIONERS TO DEFER AS A REGULATORY ASSET ) Cause No. 45380) CERTAIN INCREMENTAL EXPENSE INCREASES AND ) REVENUE REDUCTIONS OF THE UTILITY ATTRIBUTABLE ) TO COVID-19; AND (2) THE ESTABLISHMENT OF ) SUBDOCKETS FOR EACH JOINT PETITIONER IN WHICH ) EACH JOINT PETITIONER MAY ADDRESS REPAYMENT ) PROGRAMS FOR PAST DUE CUSTOMER ACCOUNTS, ) APPROVAL OF NEW BAD DEBT TRACKERS, AND/OR ) DETAILS CONCERNING THE FUTURE RECOVERY OF THE COVID-19 REGULATORY ASSET PETITION OF INDIANA OFFICE OF UTILITY CONSUMER ) COUNSELOR FOR GENERIC INVESTIGATION INTO COVID- ) 19 IMPACTS TO BE CONDUCTED OVER TWO PHASES; ) EMERGENCY RELIEF PURSUANT TO IND. CODE § 8-1-2-113 ) CAUSE NO. 45380 TO RELIEVE INDIANA RATEPAYERS OF THE THREAT OF ) UTILITY SERVICE DISCONNECTION AND PAYMENT ) ARREARAGES DURING GLOBAL HEALTH AND ECONOMIC ) CRISIS ) INDIANA OFFICE OF UTILITY CONSUMER COUNSELOR’S NOTICE PURSUANT TO JULY 7, 2021, DOCKET ENTRY The Indiana Office of Utility Consumer Counselor (“OUCC”), by counsel, hereby files its Notice in response to the Presiding Officers’ July 7, 2021, Docket Entry (the “Docket Entry”) in this Cause. In pertinent part, the Docket Entry states: To the extent any party believes there are COVID-19 related issues that remain to be determined in Phase 2, the party shall file, on or before July 26, 2021, a notice 1 under this consolidated Cause identifying and explaining the issue(s) it believes remains to be addressed in Phase 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Indianapolis Power & Light Company
    Indianapolis Power & Light Company 2016 Integrated Resource Plan Public Version Volume 1 of 3 November 1, 2016 Table of Contents Page Table of Figures ............................................................................................................................. vi Integrated Resource Plan Acronyms .............................................................................................. xi Rule Reference Table ................................................................................................................... xvi Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ 1 Section 1: Introduction ................................................................................................................. 1 1.1. IRP Objective .................................................................................................................. 1 1.2. Guiding Principles .......................................................................................................... 2 1.3. IRP Assumptions ............................................................................................................ 2 1.4. IRP Process ..................................................................................................................... 3 1.5. Stakeholder Engagement ................................................................................................ 4 1.6. Existing Customers ........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • EEI U.S. Member Company Service Territories
    EEI U.S. Member Company Service Territories Puget Sound Otter Tail Power Superior WWaateter, Light, and Power Energy Upper Michigan Energy Resources Upper Peninsula Power Company Avista Utilities NorthWestern Energy We Energies Xcel Energy Montana-Dakota Utilities Minnesota Power Portland General Green Mountain Power Electric Idaho Power NorthWestern Energy Consumers Penn Power National Central Maine Power Energy Duquesne Light Grid Company Alliant MGE DTE Energy RG&E Liberty UtilitieUtilitiess UnitiUnitill Eversource Energy Pacific Power Rocky Mountain Power MidAmerican Energy ComEd IMP NYSEG CHG&E TolEd IC West Penn Black Hills Energy Power UGI UI NIPSCO Ohio Edison PPL PSEG Long Island AES Ohio Penelec Liberty NV Energy PECO Utilities Ameren Illinois AES Ohio Potomac AES Indiana Edison Orange and Rockland Duke Energy Mon Power ConEd Evergy Ameren Missouri LG&E and KU Public Service Electric and Gas Co. Jersey Central Power & Light CenterPoint Energy Appalachian Liberty Utilities Kentucky Power Company Atlantic City Electric Power Dominion Energy Met-Ed PG&E Xcel Energy Oklahoma Gas & BGE Electric Company Mt. Carmel Public PEPCO Delmarva Power Utility Co. UniSource PNM PSO Entergy Duke Energy Arkansas Southern Arizona Public Entergy California Edison Service Co. Mississippi SWEPCO Alabama Georgia Dominion Energy Power Power Member Companies with No Service Territory San Diego Gas El Paso Oncor Electric Ohio Valley Electric Corporation & Electric Cleco Mississippi Tennessee Valley Authority (EEI Strategic Partner) Tucson Electric Power TNMP Sharyland Entergy FPU Transmission-Only Utilities Power Utilities Texas Gulf Power American Transmission Company Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota and Illinois CenterPoint Energy Entergy Duke Energy ITC Holdings Corp. Michigan, Iowa, Minnesota, Illinois, Missouri and Kansas Louisiana Alaska Hawaii Sharyland Utilities Texas Vermont Electric Power Company Vermont AEP Texas Entergy New Orleans Tampa Electric Hawaiian Electric Co.Co.
    [Show full text]
  • When Mother Nature Causes Power Outages, What Happens Next? the OUTAGE RESTORATION PROCESS, PAGE 3
    APRIL 2021 | Vol. 44, No. 4 ENERGYLINES When mother nature causes power outages, what happens next? THE OUTAGE RESTORATION PROCESS, PAGE 3 THE BEETLE +BATTLE Emerald Ash Borer mitigation shows success. PAGE 5 UNWAVERING DSM GOAL How DSM programs are helping member- consumers. PAGE 9 NEWS BRIEFLY INDUSTRY NEWS 16 MEMBERS SERVED BY G&T With a combined 700,000 member-consumers served, Brazos Electric Power Cooperative in Texas has filed for bankruptcy following the outages in February. Texas G&T files for bankruptcy ©AESIndiana.com Generation and transmission co-op Brazos Electric Power Cooperative in Texas Investor-owned utility Indianapolis Power has filed for bankruptcy. The cooperative and Light rebrands as AES Indiana is facing a $2.1 billion energy bill from the winter weather affecting the state in Investor-owned Indianapolis Power and Light (IPL), a subsidiary of The February, according to the Wall Street AES Corporation, is now AES Indiana. Rebranding efforts include a new logo. AES acquired IPL in 2001 and the utility serves more than 500,000 customers Journal. in and around Marion County. The AES Corporation is headquartered in Headquartered in Waco, the cooperative Arlington, Virginia. filed for Chapter 11 protection following invoices from the state’s grid operator for the cost of purchasing energy during a INDUSTRY NEWS ON THE COVER week-long period of high energy costs. Texas seller of electricity files How power outages In a sworn declaration, Executive Vice for bankruptcy are tracked by President and General Manager Clifton Hoosier Energy Karnei said, “Simply put, Brazos Electric include crews backed Just Energy Group Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Indianadg Exhibit 1 IURC Cause 45504 Direct Testimony of Benjamin Inskeep
    IndianaDG Exhibit 1 IURC Cause 45504 Direct Testimony of Benjamin Inskeep STATE OF INDIANA INDIANA UTILITY REGULATORY COMMISSION IN THE MATTER OF THE VERIFIED PETITION OF INDIANAPOLIS POWER & LIGHT COMPANY D/B/A AES INDIANA PURSUANT TO IND. CODE § 8-1-40-16 FOR CAUSE NO. 45504 APPROVAL OF RATE FOR THE PROCUREMENT OF EXCESS DISTRIBUTED GENERATION BY AES INDIANA DIRECT TESTIMONY OF BENJAMIN D. INSKEEP ON BEHALF OF INDIANA DISTRIBUTED ENERGY ALLIANCE AUGUST 17, 2021 1 IndianaDG Exhibit 1 IURC Cause 45504 Direct Testimony of Benjamin Inskeep TABLE OF CONTENTS I. ! INTRODUCTION!......................................................................................................................................!4! II. ! AES INDIANA’S EDG RIDER “NO NETTING” PROPOSAL!...........................................................!7! A. ! DESCRIPTION OF AES INDIANA PROPOSAL!..................................................................................................!7! B. ! EDG CREDIT CALCULATION!.......................................................................................................................!11! C. ! MEASUREMENT OF EDG!..............................................................................................................................!15! D. ! DRAWBACKS OF AES INDIANA’S “NO NETTING” PROPOSAL!....................................................................!29! 1)! AES Indiana’s “No Netting” Proposal Lacks Support!............................................................................!30! 2) ! AES Indiana’s
    [Show full text]
  • Final Plan -- Volume 1
    Table of Contents Section 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................... 1 Background ................................................................................................................................. 2 Existing Resources ...................................................................................................................... 3 Thermal Generation ................................................................................................................. 3 Wind and Solar Generation ..................................................................................................... 4 Impact of Environmental Regulations on Generation Resources ............................................... 5 New Generation ....................................................................................................................... 6 Transmission and Distribution Enhancements ........................................................................ 7 IRP Modeling Scenarios.............................................................................................................. 7 Key Driver #1 - Future Environmental Regulation ................................................................. 8 Key Driver #2 – Natural Gas Prices ........................................................................................ 9 Key Driver #3 – Load Variation .............................................................................................. 9 Resource
    [Show full text]
  • State of Indiana Indiana Utility Regulatory
    STATE OF INDIANA INDIANA UTILITY REGULATORY COMMISSION VERIFIED PETITION OF INDIANAPOLIS ) POWER & LIGHT COMPANY (“IPL”) FOR (1) ) ISSUANCE TO IPL OF A CERTIFICATE OF ) PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY FOR ) THE ACQUISITION AND DEVELOPMENT BY A ) WHOLLY-OWNED IPL SUBSIDIARY OF A ) SOLAR POWER GENERATING FACILITY TO ) BE KNOWN AS HARDY HILLS SOLAR (“THE ) HARDY HILLS PROJECT”); (2) APPROVAL OF ) THE HARDY HILLS PROJECT, INCLUDING A ) JOINT VENTURE STRUCTURE BETWEEN AN ) IPL SUBSIDIARY AND ONE OR MORE TAX ) EQUITY PARTNERS AND A CONTRACT FOR ) DIFFERENCES BETWEEN IPL AND THE ) PROJECT COMPANY THAT HOLDS AND ) OPERATES THE SOLAR GENERATION ASSETS, ) CAUSE NO. ________ AS A CLEAN ENERGY PROJECT AND ) ASSOCIATED TIMELY COST RECOVERY ) UNDER IND. CODE § 8-1-8.8-11; (3) APPROVAL ) OF ACCOUNTING AND RATEMAKING FOR ) THE HARDY HILLS PROJECT, INCLUDING AN ) ALTERNATIVE REGULATORY PLAN UNDER ) IND. CODE § 8‐1‐2.5‐6 TO FACILITATE IPL’S ) INVESTMENT IN THE HARDY HILLS PROJECT ) THROUGH A JOINT VENTURE; AND (4) TO ) THE EXTENT NECESSARY, ISSUANCE OF AN ) ORDER PURSUANT TO IND. CODE § 8‐1‐2.5‐5 ) DECLINING TO EXERCISE JURISDICTION ) OVER THE JOINT VENTURE, INCLUDING THE ) PROJECT COMPANY, AS A PUBLIC UTILITY. ) VERIFIED PETITION Indianapolis Power & Light Company (“IPL”, “Company”, or “Petitioner”) hereby petitions the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission (“Commission”) for the following approvals and authority for the acquisition and development of a solar power generating facility to be known as Hardy Hills Solar being undertaken by IPL: (1) issuance
    [Show full text]
  • State of Indiana Indiana Utility
    STATE OF INDIANA INDIANA UTILITY REGULATORY COMMISSION VERIFIED PETITION OF INDIANAPOLIS ) POWER & LIGHT COMPANY D/B/A AES ) INDIANA (“AES INDIANA”) FOR (1) ISSUANCE ) TO AES INDIANA OF A CERTIFICATE OF ) PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY FOR ) THE ACQUISITION AND DEVELOPMENT BY A ) WHOLLY OWNED AES INDIANA SUBSIDIARY ) OF A SOLAR POWER GENERATING FACILITY ) AND BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM ) PROJECT TO BE KNOWN AS THE ) PETERSBURG ENERGY CENTER (“THE ) PETERSBURG PROJECT”); (2) APPROVAL OF ) THE PETERSBURG PROJECT, INCLUDING A ) JOINT VENTURE STRUCTURE BETWEEN AN ) AES INDIANA SUBSIDIARY AND ONE OR ) MORE TAX EQUITY PARTNERS AND A ) CAUSE NO. ________ CAPACITY AGREEMENT AND CONTRACT ) FOR DIFFERENCES BETWEEN AES INDIANA ) AND THE PROJECT COMPANY THAT HOLDS ) AND OPERATES THE SOLAR GENERATION ) AND STORAGE ASSETS, AS A CLEAN ENERGY ) PROJECT AND ASSOCIATED TIMELY COST ) RECOVERY UNDER IND. CODE § 8-1-8.8-11; (3) ) APPROVAL OF ACCOUNTING AND ) RATEMAKING FOR THE PETERSBURG ) PROJECT, INCLUDING AN ALTERNATIVE ) REGULATORY PLAN UNDER IND. CODE § ) 8‐1‐2.5‐6 TO FACILITATE AES INDIANA’S ) INVESTMENT IN THE PETERSBURG PROJECT ) THROUGH A JOINT VENTURE; AND (4) TO ) THE EXTENT NECESSARY, ISSUANCE OF AN ) ORDER PURSUANT TO IND. CODE § 8‐1‐2.5‐5 ) DECLINING TO EXERCISE JURISDICTION ) OVER THE JOINT VENTURE, INCLUDING THE ) PROJECT COMPANY, AS A PUBLIC UTILITY. ) VERIFIED PETITION Indianapolis Power & Light Company d/b/a AES Indiana (“AES Indiana” “IPL”, “Company”, or “Petitioner”) hereby petitions the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission (“Commission”)
    [Show full text]