Introduction€¦ · Web view2020/03/14 · 272.595 TSS89 Z8941 11/28/2019 0.8 24,027.277 2.12%...

ComEd Voltage Optimization Impact Evaluation Report

Energy Efficiency / Demand Response Plan: Program Year 2019 (CY2019) (1/1/2019-12/31/2019)

Presented toComEd

DRAFTMarch 14, 2020

Prepared by:

Paul Higgins, Guidehouse Eric Stern, GuidehouseCarly Olig, Guidehouse Ethan Young, Guidehouse

www.guidehouse.com


Submitted to:

ComEd2011 Swift DriveOak Brook, IL 60523

Submitted by:

Guidehouse (which acquired Navigant in 2019)150 N. Riverside Plaza, Suite 2100Chicago, IL 60606

Contact:

Randy Gunn, [email protected]

Jeff Erickson, [email protected]

Carly Olig, Associate [email protected]

Disclaimer: This report was prepared by Guidehouse for ComEd. The work presented in this report represents Guidehouse’s professional judgment based on the information available at the time this report was prepared. Use of this report by any other party for whatever purpose should not, and does not, absolve such party from using due diligence in verifying the report’s contents. Neither Guidehouse nor any of its subsidiaries or affiliates assumes any liability or duty of care to such parties, and hereby disclaims any such liability.


TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Introduction.............................................................................................................................................. 12. Program Description................................................................................................................................ 13. Program Savings Detail........................................................................................................................... 14. Cumulative Persisting Annual Savings....................................................................................................35. Program Savings by Measure................................................................................................................. 56. Impact Analysis Findings and Recommendations...................................................................................5

6.1 Impact Parameter Estimates........................................................................................................56.2 Other Impact Findings and Recommendations............................................................................5

7. Appendix 1. Impact Analysis Methodology............................................................................................137.1 Energy Savings Methodology....................................................................................................137.2 Peak Demand Savings Methodology.........................................................................................16

8. Appendix 2. Impact Analysis Detail........................................................................................................179. Appendix 3. Total Resource Cost Detail................................................................................................3210. Appendix 4. Stipulation Agreement......................................................................................................33

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES

Figure 4-1. Cumulative Persisting Annual Savings.....................................................................................5Figure 6-1. Load Data for Feeder C057 on Substation TDC205................................................................7Figure 6-2. Voltage Data for Feeder D5001 on Substation TDC550..........................................................8Figure 6-3. Voltage Data for Feeder F461 on Substation TDC446.............................................................8Figure 6-4. Voltage Data for Feeder G6971 on Substation TDC469..........................................................9Figure 6-6. Voltage Data for Feeder H787 on Substation DCH78..............................................................9Figure 6-7. Voltage Data for Feeder C858 on Substation DCC85............................................................11Figure 6-7. Voltage Data for Feeder W513 on Substation DCW51..........................................................11Figure 6-8. Voltage Data for Feeder E81 on Substation DCE8................................................................12Figure 6-9. Voltage Data for Feeder W190 on Substation DCW119........................................................13

Table 2-1. CY2019 Volumetric Findings Detail...........................................................................................1Table 3-1. CY2019 Total Annual Incremental Electric Savings..................................................................2Table 4-1. Cumulative Persisting Annual Savings (CPAS) – Electric.........................................................4Table 7-1. Data Reconstruction Priority Sequence...................................................................................15Table 7-2. Data Reconstruction................................................................................................................16Table 8-1. CY2019 Verified VO Energy Savings and Voltage Reductions by Feeder..............................17Table 8-2. CY2019 VO RRs by Substation..............................................................................................29Table 9-1. Total Resource Cost Savings Summary..................................................................................32

Page i


1. INTRODUCTION

This report presents the results of the impact evaluation of ComEd’s CY2019 Voltage Optimization (VO) Program. It includes a summary of the energy and demand impacts for the total program broken out by relevant measure and program structure details. The appendix provides the impact analysis methodology and details of the Total Resource Cost inputs. CY2019 covers January 1, 2019 through December 31, 2019.

2. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The VO Program comprises ComEd’s plan to install hardware and software systems on a significant fraction of its electric power distribution grid to achieve voltage and reactive power optimization (volt-var optimization, or VVO) over the 2018-2025 time frame. VVO is a smart grid technology that uses distributed sensors, two-way communications infrastructure, remote controls on substation transformer load-tap changers and line capacitor banks, and integrating/optimizing software to flatten voltage profiles and lower average voltage levels on an electric power distribution grid. ComEd is working with an automation-optimization hardware and software vendor1 to implement the VO program on selected parts of its distribution grid over the 2018-2025 period.

Unlike energy efficiency programs that achieve savings by providing financial incentives to encourage customers to adopt energy-efficient equipment or behavioral suggestions to encourage them to adopt no-cost energy-saving behaviors, the VO Program involves no direct customer engagement. Instead, savings is achieved by operating the voltage and reactive power controls on VO-enabled feeders and substations in a manner designed to maintain the voltages delivered to affected customers in the lower part of the allowable voltage range.2

The program installed and commissioned VO systems on a total of 386 feeders at 68 substations in CY2019, as shown in the following table.3

Table 2-1. CY2019 Volumetric Findings Detail

Participation Count

VO-Enabled Substations 68

VO-Enabled Feeders 386Source: ComEd tracking data and evaluation team analysis

3. PROGRAM SAVINGS DETAIL

Table 3-2 summarizes the incremental energy and demand savings the VO Program achieved in CY2019. As VO is not a customer facing program there is no free ridership and no spillover and as such

1 Open Systems International (OSI) of Medina, Minnesota.2 The bulk of the energy savings that occurs is thus expected to occur on the customer side of the meter, although additional savings is expected from reduced current flows along the full length of the affected circuits.3 CY2019 VO installations occurred throughout the program year. Error: Reference source not found shows only those substations and feeders on which installation, commissioning and system testing were completed by December 31, 2019.

Page 1


the net-to-gross (NTG) ratio is 1 and net and gross savings are identical. The program did not claim, and the evaluation did not examine, gas savings.

It should be noted that Guidehouse calculated the gross realization rate (RR)4 shown in Table 3-2 using estimates for ex ante savings that ComEd derived from a 2014 VO potential study5 that did not follow the methodology specified by the 2019 Stipulation Agreement6 between ComEd, the Illinois Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC), and other parties. Thus, there is no presumption that the expected RR for the CY2019 VO Program should equal 1.0.

Table 3-2. CY2019 Total Annual Incremental Electric Savings

Savings Category Energy Savings (kWh)Non-Coincident Demand

Savings (kW)Summer Peak* Demand

Savings (kW)ElectricityEx Ante Gross Savings 198,403,000 NR NRProgram Gross Realization Rate 0.87 NR NRVerified Gross Savings 172,573,526 NR 20,942Program Net-to-Gross Ratio (NTG) 1.00 NR 1.00Verified Net Savings 172,573,526 NR 20,942Converted from Gas†Ex Ante Gross Savings NA NA NA

Program Gross Realization Rate NA NA NA

Verified Gross Savings NA NA NAProgram Net-to-Gross Ratio (NTG) NA NA NAVerified Net Savings NA NA NATotal Electric Plus GasEx Ante Gross Savings 198,403,000 NR NR

Program Gross Realization Rate 0.87 NR NR

Verified Gross Savings 172,573,526 NR 20,942

Program Net-to-Gross Ratio (NTG) 1.00 NR 1.00Verified Net Savings 172,573,526 NR 20,942NR = Not reported (refers to a piece of data that was not reported, i.e., non-coincident demand savings)NA = Not applicable (refers to a piece of data that cannot be produced or does not apply)* The coincident summer peak period is defined as 1:00-5:00 p.m. Central Prevailing Time on non-holiday weekdays, June through August.† The evaluation did not estimate gas savings for this program.Source: ComEd tracking data and evaluation team analysis

4 The gross RR is defined as the ratio of verified gross savings to ex ante gross savings.5 AEG, Voltage Optimization (VO) Feasibility Study, Final Report, March 9, 2015.6 Joint Ex. 1.0, Stipulation Agreement, Docket No. 19-0580, between Commonwealth Edison, the Staff of the ICC, the Citizens Utility Board, Environmental Defense Fund, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and the People of the State of Illinois (AG), hereinafter referenced as “Stipulation Agreement.” <https://icc.illinois.gov/docket/files.aspx?no=P2019-0580&docId=291954>

Page 2


4. CUMULATIVE PERSISTING ANNUAL SAVINGS

Table 4-3 and Figure 4-1 show the measure-specific and total verified gross savings for the VO Program and the cumulative persisting annual savings (CPAS) for the measures installed in CY2019. The electric CPAS across all measures installed in 2019 is 172,573,526 kWh (Table 4-3). Guidehouse did not evaluate gas savings for this program and as such electric CPAS is equivalent to total CPAS. The “historic” rows in the table are the CPAS contribution back to CY2018. The “Program Total Electric CPAS” is the sum of the CY2019 contribution and the historic contribution.

Page 3


Table 4-3. Cumulative Persisting Annual Savings (CPAS) – ElectricVerified Net kWh Savings

End Use Type Research Category EUL

CY2019 Verified Gross Savings (kWh) NTG*

Lifetime Net Savings (kWh)† 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026

All VO 15.0 172,573,526 1.00 2,588,602,890 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 CY2019 Program Total Electric Contribution to CPAS 172,573,526 2,588,602,890 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 Historic Program Total Electric Contribution to CPAS‡ 66,014,049 66,014,049 66,014,049 66,014,049 66,014,049 66,014,049 66,014,049 66,014,049 66,014,049 Program Total Electric CPAS 66,014,049 238,587,575 238,587,575 238,587,575 238,587,575 238,587,575 238,587,575 238,587,575 238,587,575 CY2019 Program Incremental Expiring Electric Savings§ - - - - - - - Historic Program Incremental Expiring Electric Savings‡§ - - - - - - - - Program Total Incremental Expiring Electric Savings§ - - - - - - - -

End Use Type Research Category 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038All VO 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 CY2019 Program Total Electric Contribution to CPAS 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 - - - - - Historic Program Total Electric Contribution to CPAS‡ 66,014,049 66,014,049 66,014,049 66,014,049 66,014,049 66,014,049 Program Total Electric CPAS 238,587,575 238,587,575 238,587,575 238,587,575 238,587,575 238,587,575 172,573,526 - - - - - CY2019 Program Incremental Expiring Electric Savings§ - - - - - - - 172,573,526 - - - - Historic Program Incremental Expiring Electric Savings‡§ - - - - - - 66,014,049 - - - - - Program Total Incremental Expiring Electric Savings§ - - - - - - 66,014,049 172,573,526 - - - -

Note: The green highlighted cell shows program total first year electric savings. The gray cells are blank, indicating values irrelevant to the CY2019 contribution to CPAS.* A deemed value. Source: is to be found on the Illinois SAG web site here: https://www.ilsag.info/ntg_2019.† Lifetime savings are the sum of CPAS savings through the EUL.‡ Historical savings go back to CY2018§ Incremental expiring savings are equal to CPAS Yn-1 - CPAS Yn

Source: Evaluation team analysis

Page 4


Figure 4-1. Cumulative Persisting Annual Savings

-

20,000,000

40,000,000

60,000,000

80,000,000

100,000,000

120,000,000

140,000,000

160,000,000

180,000,000

200,000,000

201820192020202120222023202420252026202720282029203020312032203320342035203620372038203920402041204220432044204520462047204820492050

Verif

ied

Net

kW

h

YearCY2019 Program Total Contribution to CPAS CY2019 Program Incremental Expiring Savings§

* Expiring savings are equal to CPAS Yn-1 - CPAS Yn.Source: Evaluation team analysis

5. PROGRAM SAVINGS BY MEASURE

There is only one measure in this program and so measure-level results are the same as the program-level results discussed in the previous section. See Section 8 below for detailed savings results.

6. IMPACT ANALYSIS FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 Impact Parameter Estimates

The VO Program does not have relevant impact parameters.

6.2 Other Impact Findings and Recommendations

The evaluation team developed several recommendations based on findings from the CY2019 evaluation. Note that the Stipulation Agreement prescribed a data reconstruction process, which filled in data that was missing or removed by data cleaning. Guidehouse followed the Stipulation Agreement and guidance provided by ComEd in implementing said reconstruction process.7 The data cleaning and reconstruction processes are described in Section 7.1.

Finding 1. Following the methodology outlined in the Stipulation Agreement, Guidehouse found energy savings of 172,573,526 kWh for the CY2019 VO feeders resulting in a RR of 0.87. However, the ex ante savings ComEd reported for the CY2019 VO feeders were derived from a 2014 VO potential study that did not follow the methodology specified by the Stipulation

7 ComEd’s guidance was provided in a PowerPoint titled 2019 VO Measurement & Verification Methodology dated November 6th, 2019.

Page 5


Agreement. Thus, there is no presumption that the expected RR for the CY2019 VO Program should equal 1.0.

Recommendation 1. Guidehouse recommends that in the future ComEd provide ex ante savings values that align with the evaluation methodology being utilized so that the RR reflects an apples-to-apples comparison.

Finding 2. Feeder data provided by ComEd appears to include some feeders with time stamps in Central Prevailing Time and some feeders with time stamps in Central Standard Time. Guidehouse was unable to reliably distinguish between the two. As the majority of feeders appear to be in Central Standard Time, Guidehouse assumed Central Standard Time for all feeders.

Recommendation 2. Guidehouse recommends that ComEd include time zones with their time stamped data in the future or provide Guidehouse with a list of which feeders record time in Central Standard Time and which in Central Prevailing Time.

Finding 3. Guidehouse identified several instances where the identifier associated with a VO transformer changed over time. For example, ComEd labeled one transformer TR51 in 2018 and TR1 in 2019. Guidehouse believes we identified all these instances and correlated the appropriate data together.

Recommendation 3. Guidehouse recommends that ComEd keep the VO transformer identifiers the same from year to year. Alternatively, if ComEd needs to change an identifier we recommend they provide Guidehouse with a list explicitly mapping the changes from year to year.

Finding 4. Guidehouse found that many feeders labelled as single phase in the feeder information file we received are actually three phase. For example, feeders B961, C801 and D164 had “1” values entered in the Phase field of the feeder information file, but had separate amps readings for phases A, B and C in the time-series data ComEd provided. Guidehouse identified these feeders and treated them appropriately.

Recommendation 4. Guidehouse recommends that ComEd review the phase information in the feeder information file and update it as needed.

Finding 5. Guidehouse found that the data received for this program included many different values indicating bad or missing data. These included but were not limited to: “Bad Quality”, “bad quality”, “No Data”, “Historical data not extracted”, “missing”, “NA”, and “#N/A”.

Recommendation 5. Guidehouse recommends that ComEd standardize their values to indicate bad or missing data.

Finding 6. Many feeders have jumps or dips in load when load shifting occurs across feeders. These changes are observed in the actual data but are obscured by the data reconstruction process Guidehouse had to use to estimate missing data.8 Figure 6-2 shows an example of this for feeder C057 on substation TDC205, where the red line is showing actual, measured data and the other colors show reconstructed data.9

8 The data cleaning and reconstruction process are discussed in detail in Section 7.9 The colors of the reconstructed data refer to the priority bins shown in Table 7-4.

Page 6


Figure 6-2. Load Data for Feeder C057 on Substation TDC205

Source: Evaluation team analysis.

Finding 7. For many of the feeders on substation TDC550, Guidehouse found that most of the actual voltage and load data is missing or removed by the stipulated data cleaning process starting in September 2019. The reconstructed load data appear to match the actual data fairly well. However, the actual voltage data appear to increase at this time without an increase in the reconstructed data. Figure 6-3 shows an example of this for feeder D5001, where the red dots show actual, measured data and the other colors show reconstructed data.

Page 7


Figure 6-3. Voltage Data for Feeder D5001 on Substation TDC550


Finding 8. For many of the feeders on substation TDC446, Guidehouse found that much of the reconstructed voltage data is lower than the actual data in the same or a neighboring time period. This appears to be caused by an increase in voltage in March 2019. Figure 6-4 shows an example of this for feeder F461, where the red dots show actual, measured data and the other colors show reconstructed data.

Figure 6-4. Voltage Data for Feeder F461 on Substation TDC446


Finding 9. For many of the feeders on substation TDC469, Guidehouse found that much of the data in the first half of the year is missing or removed by the data cleaning process. The reconstructed load data appear to match the actual data fairly well. However, the actual voltage data during this time frame is very high compared to the reconstructed data and the rest of the year. Figure 6-5 shows an example of this for feeder G6971, where the red dots show actual, measured data and the other colors show reconstructed data.

Page 8


Figure 6-5. Voltage Data for Feeder G6971 on Substation TDC469


Recommendation 6. Guidehouse recommends ComEd investigate why actual voltage was anomalously high during the first half of 2019 for feeders on substation TDC469.

Finding 10. For feeders on substation DCH78, reconstructed voltage data for January through March is low compared to contemporaneous actual values and to the rest of 2019. This appears to be caused by a sharp increase in actual measured voltage in August 2018; the low values from the first half of 2018 pull down the reconstructed values for 2019. Figure 6-6 shows feeder H787 as an example of this where the red dots show actual, measured data and the other colors show reconstructed data.

Figure 6-6. Voltage Data for Feeder H787 on Substation DCH78


Recommendation 7. Guidehouse recommends ComEd and Guidehouse work together to revisit and potentially refine the data reconstruction process for future evaluation years, and in consideration of the final methodology for version 9 of the TRM, to better deal with the types of situations raised in findings 6 through 10.

Page 9


Finding 11. Many feeders have sustained periods of VO off when we expected to see VO on/off testing occurring (i.e., after VO was enabled);10 note that VO savings only accrue when VO is turned on. The Stipulation Agreement states, “the savings reductions during the VO On/Off testing shall not be a basis to reduce the estimated savings, the off periods shall be treated as if they were on during the evaluation.” In this draft report, Guidehouse has annualized savings for all feeders such that the verified savings reflect savings as if VO were on for the entire year and there is no penalization for off periods unrelated to on/off testing.

Examples of feeders with extended (approximately 2 weeks or longer) off periods include, but are be limited to:

Feeder C858 on substation DCC85 had VO enabled in January but had VO off from early July through the end of 2019.

o As an example to illustrate this issue, Figure 6-7 shows reconstructed voltage data for this feeder where the red dots show actual, measured data and the other colors show reconstructed data.

Feeder C211 on substation DCC21 had VO enabled in March but had fewer than 10 days with VO turned on for the rest of the year.

Feeder C661 on substation DCC66 had a sustained off period from August 20th to September 9th. Several other feeders had sustained off periods over the same period including:

o 2 feeders on substation DCD40o 12 feeders on substation TDC216o 1 feeder on substation DCC25

The 10 feeders on substation TDC568 had an extended off period from September 3 to September 19 with just one on period of approximately 14 hours during this time.

The 8 feeders on substation TDC552 had an extended off period from August 19 to September 19 with just one on period of approximately 8 hours during this time.

Feeder G091 on substation DCG909 had VO enabled in March but had sustained off periods from March 26 to April 30 and July 9 to July 29. This feeder also had only 3 half-hour instances of VO on from September 2 through the end of the year.

On substation DCW50 feeders W500 and W501 had a sustained off period from July 8 to August 18.

o Note that feeder W502 was not affected by these off periods but did have several extended periods of VO on throughout the year.

The 36 feeders on substation TSS137 had extended off periods from Feb 21 to March 16, April 15 to April 30, and Nov 20 to the end of the year.

10 Note that the VO on/off testing was designed as an experiment where VO would be on for 4 days and then off for 4 days. This design makes the change in VO status independent of any other variables that affect load or voltage (such as weather, time of day, and day of week) such that the impact of VO can be measured in an unbiased fashion. Extended period of VO on or off comprise the validity of the experimental design.

Page 10


Figure 6-7. Voltage Data for Feeder C858 on Substation DCC85


Recommendation 8. Guidehouse recommends ComEd confer with the stipulating parties on how extended off periods unrelated to VO on/off testing (i.e., after VO was enabled) should be treated in terms of CY2019 claimed savings. Any guidance from the stipulating parties should clearly explain any periods for which savings should not accrue for CY2019 (either by explicitly identifying each period for which savings should not accrue or providing a clear time-based cutoff such as any off period over 2 weeks after VO is enabled should not accrue savings) and how those periods should affect savings for the lifetime of the measure for CPAS. Guidehouse also recommends ComEd investigate why on/off testing of VO was ceased for extended periods of time on these feeders.

Finding 12. Feeder W513 on substation DCW51 appears to have little on/off testing occurring and shows voltage inconsistent with the VO status flags. This feeder went live on 6/26/2019 but has fewer than 7 days with VO marked as on from 7/1/2019 to 12/31/2019. In particular, VO is marked off for all of November and December 2019. Additionally, reconstructed voltage in the first 5 months of the year is low compared to actual voltage in the same time period. This feeder’s voltage data is shown in Figure 6-8 where the red dots show actual, measured data and the other colors show reconstructed data.

Figure 6-8. Voltage Data for Feeder W513 on Substation DCW51


Page 11


Recommendation 9. Guidehouse recommends ComEd investigate why on/off testing was not occurring as expected for feeder W513 and whether the VO status flags received by Guidehouse are accurate given the drops in voltage during periods marked as VO off.

Finding 13. Feeder E81 on substation DCE8 has long periods where VO status is on, but voltage cycling appears to be occurring. This feeder’s voltage data is shown in Figure 6-9 where the red dots show actual, measured data and the other colors show reconstructed data.

Figure 6-9. Voltage Data for Feeder E81 on Substation DCE8


Recommendation 10. Guidehouse recommends ComEd investigate whether the VO status flags for feeder E81 received by Guidehouse are accurate given the cycling voltage during periods marked entirely as VO on.

Finding 14. Guidehouse observed multiple instances of VO status flags being misaligned by several hours with the swings in voltage typically observed under VO on/off testing. This issue is pervasive across many feeders and one example is shown in Figure 6-10 for feeder W190 on substation DCW119. For this feeder, the drop in voltage characteristic of VO starts several hours before the VO status shows on and continues for a few hours after VO status is off. This misalignment causes issues for a few reasons:

1. Since data reconstruction is based on observations with the same VO status flag, such misalignment could result in reconstructed VO off observations being lower than they should be or reconstructed VO on observations being higher than they should be.

2. The same issue as item 1 applies to constructing the counterfactual voltage.3. When regression is used to estimate VO impacts (for example, in peak estimation for

CY2019 or in the methods being used for version 9.0 of the TRM) such misalignment dilutes the relationship between voltage and VO status.

Page 12


Figure 6-10. Voltage Data for Feeder W190 on Substation DCW119


Recommendation 11. Guidehouse recommends that ComEd review how the VO status is tracked and explain why the VO status flags do not seem well aligned with voltage changes.

7. APPENDIX 1. IMPACT ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY

The Stipulation Agreement specifies how the evaluator will calculate savings for the CY2019 VO program.11 The relevant text of the Stipulation Agreement (Section II.7) is included as Appendix 4. Guidehouse followed that stipulated approach and guidance provided by ComEd12 in estimating CY2019 savings. The following sections describe how we estimated CY2019 energy and summer peak demand savings from the VO Program.

7.1 Energy Savings Methodology

The stipulation methodology relies on a conservation voltage reduction factor (CVRf), which is deemed at 0.8, and utilizes Equation 7-1 to estimate energy savings.

Equation 7-1. Stipulation Energy Savings Calculation

Energy Savings=EnergyBaseline∗CVRf∗voltage reduction percentage

Appendix 4 reproduces the relevant sections of the stipulation; this section does not reproduce the stiulation but provides relevant details that supplement the information in the stipulation.

Regarding Section c on the energy baseline.

1. In regard to Section c.i, in cases where power (MW) data was not available, Guidehouse converted the corresponding current (amps) value to MW using Equation 7-2 through Equation 7-4. This conversion was applied to pre-VO data for 95 feeders.

11 See footnote 6.12 See footnote 7.

Page 13


Equation 7-2. Amps to MW Conversion (3-Phase with Line-to-Line Voltage)

Pt=√3∗V t∗I t∗p f

Equation 7-3. Amps-to-MW Conversion (3-Phase with Line-to-Neutral Voltage)

Pt=3∗V t∗I t∗pf

Equation 7-4. Amps-to-MW Conversion (Single Phase)

Pt=V t∗It∗p f

where:Pt Calculated MW data at time tV t Average measured voltage at time tI t Average measured amps at time tpf Power factor assumed to be 0.913

2. In regard to Section c.ii, Guidehouse created a lookup table to reconstruct load (MW) and voltage data that was missing or eliminated by the data cleaning process (see bullet 3) based on the priority sequence shown in Table 7-4. Guidehouse used data from January 1, 2018 through January 31, 2020 to reconstruct data for CY2019. Guidehouse chose not to reconstruct data for feeders with fewer than 1000 measured data points after cleaning; this resulted in two feeders (W258 and C162Y) being dropped and assigned savings based on the average of all the other feeders.

13 Empirical review of the CY2019 time-series data from VO Program feeders shows the actual measured power factor ranges from 0.1 to 1, with the majority falling in the 0.80 to 1 range. Guidehouse used 0.9 to align with ComEd’s assumed power factor.

Page 14


Table 7-4. Data Reconstruction Priority Sequence

Priority Components and Commonalities of Table

1 Season*, Temperature†, Day Type‡, Hour§, VO Status

2 Temperature, Day Type, Hour, VO Status

3-5 Temperature +/-5||, Day Type, Hour, VO Status

6 Season, Day Type, Hour, VO Status

7 Temperature, Day Type, VO Status

8 Season, Day Type, VO Status

9 Temperature, VO Status

10 Season, VO Status

11 VO Status, Day Type, Hour

12 VO Status, Day Type

13 VO Status* Seasons are: Spring (March to May), Summer (June to August), Fall (September to November), and Winter (December to February)† Temperature was binned to the ceiling of the nearest 5°F interval. Guidehouse sourced temperature data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Quality Controlled Local Climatological Data (QCLCD) weather station geographically closest to each feeder. Guidehouse filled in missing data via linear interpolation (for gaps of 4 or fewer hours) or from the next closest weather station (for gaps longer than 4 hours).‡ Day types are weekdays (Monday to Friday) and weekends (Saturday and Sunday).§ Hour refers to the same hour of the day.|| Temperature +/-5 refers to temperatures one 5°F bin above or below the temperature of the observation being reconstructed. This occurred in three stages where we first looked across the bin above and below and then in just one or the other if there were no data points in one of them.Source: ComEd

3. In regard to Section c.iii, Guidehouse cleaned the MW data by removing anomalous values of the following types:

a. Negative valuesb. Non-numeric valuesc. Zero valuesd. Missing valuese. Repetitive values14

f. Interpolated values15

g. Outlier valuesi. Defined as values above 110% or below 10% of the feeder peak load for feeders

without distributed energy resources (DER)ii. Defined as values above 110% of the feeder peak load or below the expected

reverse power for feeders with DER16

14 Repetitive values are cases where three values in a row match up to six decimal places.15 Interpolated values are detected when the difference between values is the same (up to three decimal places) for at least two values in a row.16 The expected reverse power flow (Prep) is calculated based on the total installed DER capacity on the feeder (PDER) and the expected feeder demand during DER peak time (PDemand = 50% of feeder peak load):

Prev=PDemand−PDER

Page 15


4. In regard to Section c.v, Guidehouse accounted for line losses of 3.67%.17

Regarding Section d on the voltage reduction percentage:

1. In regard to Section d.i and d.v, Guidehouse constructed the counterfactual voltage profile based on the same priority sequence as shown in Table 7-4.

2. In regard to Section d.iii and d.iv, Guidehouse cleaned the voltage data by removing anomalous values of the same types as for the MW data (see bullet 3 regarding Section c) except outlier values are defined as values above 1.10 per unit (p.u.) and below 0.90 p.u. of the nominal line-to-line voltage level for regular transformers and the line-to-neutral voltage for DC-in-a-box (DCIAB) transformers. Guidehouse reconstructed missing and eliminated voltage data using the same priority sequence as shown in Table 7-4.

Table 7-5 shows how much of the reconstructed data came from each priority bin in Table 7-4.

Table 7-5. Data Reconstruction

Priority Bin Percentage

Actual Measured 70.90%

1 16.70%

2 10.70%

3-5 1.50%

6 0.00%

7 0.10%

8 <0.01%

9 <0.01%

10 0.00%

11 <0.01%

12 <0.01%

13 0.00%Source: ComEd tracking data and evaluation team analysis

7.2 Peak Demand Savings Methodology

Summer peak demand savings are not mentioned in the Stipulation Agreement. Guidehouse’s method utilized a regression model that takes advantage of the VO on/off testing to estimate summer peak period savings. We felt this was more accurate than modifying the Stipulation methodology as it does not rely on using a deemed CVR factor of 0.8, which may not be correct for the summer peak period.18 Additionally, the regression analysis utilizes the experimental design, wherein VO was meant to be turned on and off on a set schedule independent of any other factors, which is the gold standard for evaluation.

17 Distribution system energy losses is 3.67% based on ComEd’s filed 2018 ComEd Distribution System Loss Study.18 Assuming 0.8 is the correct CVR factor for the entire year (all seasons, all day types, all hours of the day), it would be unlikely to also be the correct CVR factor for the summer peak period.

Page 16


Guidehouse only utilized CY2019 feeders which had VO enabled by August 1, 2019 in order to have sufficient peak period on/off testing data for the regression; we applied the average savings from these 153 feeders to all 386 CY2019 feeders to get total summer peak demand savings.

For the summer peak demand savings estimation, Guidehouse utilized the cleaned data, before reconstruction, from the energy savings methodology described above. We subset the data to contain only summer peak period days: non-holiday weekdays from June 1 through August 31. We then ran the pooled regression models shown in Equation 7-5 across all feeders to estimate VO’s impact on load and voltage. We utilized this pooled approach rather than feeder-by-feeder estimation because it achieved a higher level of statistical significance, and the summer peak savings averaged across all feeders provides sufficient information for cost-effectiveness modelling.

Equation 7-5. Summer Peak Demand Load and Voltage Regression Models

MW ¿=ηi+τh+αV O ¿+βV O¿∙ offpeak t+γCH D¿+ωCDH ¿2+e¿

k V ¿=ηi+ τh+αV O¿+βV O¿ ∙ offpea k t+γCH D ¿+ωCD H ¿2+e¿

where:MW ¿ Load (MW) on feeder i at half-hour tk V ¿ Voltage (kV) on feeder i at half-hour tηi A feeder fixed effect for feeder i, controlling for fixed feeder

characteristics that may affect VOτ h An hourly fixed effect for each hour of the day hV O¿ An indicator equal to 1 when VO is on for feeder i during half-hour toffpeak t An off-peak indicator equal to 1 when half-hour t is between 12:00 AM

through 12:59 PM and 5:00 PM through 11:59 PM in Central Prevailing Time

CDH ¿ and CDH ¿2 Cooling degree hours, base 65, for feeder i during half-hour t and its

square to capture nonlinear impacts of temperature on cooling load

e¿ The cluster-robust error term for feeder i during half-hour t19

The coefficient α represents the impact of VO during the summer peak period.

8. APPENDIX 2. IMPACT ANALYSIS DETAIL

Table 8-6 presents the verified CY2019 VO Program energy impacts by feeder and Table 8-7 presents the RR by substation.

Table 8-6. CY2019 Verified VO Energy Savings and Voltage Reductions by Feeder

Substation Feeder VO Go-

Live Date CVRfEnergy

Baseline (MWh)

Average Voltage

Reduction (%)

Verified Energy Savings (MWh)

DCA37 A372 10/31/2019 0.8 16,392.878 4.19% 530.427

DCB96 B961 5/24/2019 0.8 26,536.456 3.60% 718.359

19 Cluster-robust errors account for heteroskedasticity and autocorrelation at the feeder-level.

Page 17




Baseline (MWh)

Average Voltage

Reduction (%)


DCC21 C211 3/8/2019 0.8 8,265.529 2.94% 183.247

DCC25 C253 7/5/2019 0.8 18,798.601 3.38% 461.601

DCC61 C615 2/28/2019 0.8 25,443.738 4.45% 859.000

DCC66 C661 5/8/2019 0.8 24,588.606 3.48% 638.798

DCC85 C858 1/25/2019 0.8 13,434.492 4.20% 430.087

DCD20 D2002 1/18/2019 0.8 15,375.187 3.52% 407.429

DCD351 D5111 2/9/2019 0.8 25,934.212 4.15% 812.892

DCD40 D4020 4/30/2019 0.8 24,184.492 4.31% 794.627

DCD40 D4021 4/30/2019 0.8 21,017.671 4.54% 728.841

DCD46 D4602 1/8/2019 0.8 23,264.401 3.97% 686.316

DCE16 E134 7/29/2019 0.8 21,199.355 4.53% 733.318

DCE16 E135 7/29/2019 0.8 17,655.757 3.76% 497.554

DCE17 E175 3/8/2019 0.8 13,371.415 3.80% 389.361

DCE29 E295 6/26/2019 0.8 16,376.895 3.57% 440.139

DCE29 E296 6/26/2019 0.8 20,390.844 3.88% 601.030

DCE35 E355 10/23/2019 0.8 10,218.189 5.02% 392.808

DCE35 E356 10/23/2019 0.8 20,298.953 4.15% 639.109

DCE46 E465 6/26/2019 0.8 15,563.112 3.88% 457.842

DCE79 E792 8/1/2019 0.8 18,020.974 2.90% 374.071

DCE8 E81 7/31/2019 0.8 15,602.137 4.58% 545.686

DCE8 E82 9/9/2019 0.8 16,263.316 4.58% 567.362

DCF45 F457 6/4/2019 0.8 25,102.307 4.00% 755.930

DCF45 F458 6/4/2019 0.8 25,016.755 3.60% 687.045

DCG121 G211 2/28/2019 0.8 18,016.167 3.93% 536.145

DCG42 G429 9/13/2019 0.8 27,440.670 3.73% 770.235

DCG88 G881 2/9/2019 0.8 21,678.329 3.58% 581.334

DCG909 G091 3/24/2019 0.8 6,261.016 2.46% 116.279

DCH27 H275 10/31/2019 0.8 23,447.726 3.82% 681.556

DCH56 H565 10/31/2019 0.8 6,436.410 3.75% 189.115

DCH56 H566 10/31/2019 0.8 3,023.239 3.74% 89.709

DCH65 H652 8/23/2019 0.8 16,446.342 2.40% 308.203

DCH76 H761 10/5/2019 0.8 30,620.019 1.21% 291.910

DCH78 H786 12/12/2019 0.8 22,271.717 4.21% 719.690

DCH78 H787 12/12/2019 0.8 22,322.540 4.15% 707.105

DCJ19 J195 7/29/2019 0.8 21,075.416 3.81% 605.268

DCJ19 J196 7/29/2019 0.8 17,743.019 4.10% 547.319

DCJ87 J875 3/1/2019 0.8 23,058.321 3.55% 607.612

Page 18




Baseline (MWh)

Average Voltage

Reduction (%)


DCS67 S675 9/30/2019 0.8 14,727.059 2.79% 312.285

DCW115 W152 4/30/2019 0.8 22,953.866 3.19% 538.909

DCW115 W175 4/30/2019 0.8 15,750.174 4.13% 497.200

DCW119 W190 9/27/2019 0.8 23,754.803 3.33% 589.424

DCW119 W191 9/27/2019 0.8 11,303.343 4.41% 375.623

DCW148 W140 11/27/2019 0.8 22,253.947 4.51% 778.005

DCW148 W142 11/27/2019 0.8 20,714.645 4.24% 680.143

DCW25 W258* 4/30/2019 0.8 NA NA 447.082

DCW304 W041 10/23/2019 0.8 20,929.278 3.24% 522.505

DCW41 W4101 10/23/2019 0.8 26,945.310 3.51% 715.850

DCW44 W4401 12/5/2019 0.8 22,136.297 3.32% 569.052

DCW46 W467 12/6/2019 0.8 17,969.549 3.83% 531.495

DCW50 W500 4/30/2019 0.8 18,780.405 4.06% 579.023

DCW50 W501 4/30/2019 0.8 18,889.397 3.59% 514.946

DCW50 W502 4/30/2019 0.8 24,248.372 4.22% 794.569

DCW51 W511 2/1/2019 0.8 19,159.873 4.39% 635.012

DCW51 W513 6/26/2019 0.8 27,238.067 0.18% 39.414

SS311 H113 3/30/2019 0.8 17,266.898 3.50% 451.971

SS459 F595 4/30/2019 0.8 13,059.280 4.01% 394.904

SS459 F596 4/30/2019 0.8 17,080.917 3.73% 483.976

SS513 W1310 11/1/2019 0.8 24,498.836 2.70% 504.047

SS513 W1311 11/1/2019 0.8 23,580.408 3.73% 678.641

SS513 W1312 11/1/2019 0.8 24,891.768 3.42% 636.882

SS513 W1313 11/1/2019 0.8 21,507.720 3.70% 609.544

SS553 W530 8/14/2019 0.8 15,576.870 4.40% 513.662

SS553 W531 8/14/2019 0.8 14,234.067 2.99% 294.903

TDC205 C050 4/30/2019 0.8 17,090.946 4.58% 599.139

TDC205 C051 4/30/2019 0.8 30,594.234 4.07% 945.599

TDC205 C0510 4/30/2019 0.8 21,202.601 4.58% 735.295

TDC205 C052 4/30/2019 0.8 21,924.230 4.07% 681.589

TDC205 C053 4/30/2019 0.8 19,965.126 4.56% 690.424

TDC205 C054 4/30/2019 0.8 13,990.849 4.57% 488.413

TDC205 C055 4/30/2019 0.8 15,346.197 4.54% 531.401

TDC205 C056 4/30/2019 0.8 33,966.806 4.07% 1045.678

TDC205 C057 4/30/2019 0.8 20,005.799 3.98% 609.595

TDC205 C058 4/30/2019 0.8 15,940.095 4.55% 550.347

TDC205 C059 4/30/2019 0.8 18,287.675 4.06% 562.657

Page 19




Baseline (MWh)

Average Voltage

Reduction (%)


TDC216 C160 7/29/2019 0.8 24,605.045 3.72% 696.919

TDC216 C161 7/29/2019 0.8 25,987.191 4.42% 851.927

TDC216 C162X 7/29/2019 0.8 31,624.910 3.74% 889.816

TDC216 C162Y* 7/29/2019 0.8 NA NA 447.082

TDC216 C163 7/29/2019 0.8 15,138.705 4.42% 493.953

TDC216 C164 7/29/2019 0.8 27,515.252 3.80% 785.465

TDC216 C165X 7/29/2019 0.8 7,140.424 4.39% 230.773

TDC216 C165Y 7/29/2019 0.8 13,324.632 4.42% 444.921

TDC216 C166 7/29/2019 0.8 3,858.788 3.67% 103.587

TDC216 C167 7/29/2019 0.8 17,854.968 4.42% 596.434

TDC216 C168 7/29/2019 0.8 18,720.046 3.73% 520.913

TDC216 C169 7/29/2019 0.8 10,812.692 4.40% 363.028

TDC317 H1777 11/27/2019 0.8 18,323.053 4.27% 594.613

TDC317 H1778 11/27/2019 0.8 21,642.820 4.26% 705.412

TDC317 H1781 11/27/2019 0.8 9,150.769 4.25% 294.370

TDC317 H1782 11/27/2019 0.8 26,566.427 4.24% 859.549

TDC372 H7270 9/27/2019 0.8 19,193.164 2.17% 313.871

TDC372 H7271 9/27/2019 0.8 25,045.139 2.14% 403.804

TDC372 H7274 9/27/2019 0.8 8,453.894 3.32% 208.009

TDC372 H7275 9/27/2019 0.8 26,565.909 2.99% 600.212

TDC372 H7276 9/27/2019 0.8 22,937.947 2.99% 514.186

TDC435 F3571 12/20/2019 0.8 14,406.947 2.55% 279.348

TDC435 F3572 12/20/2019 0.8 24,224.365 2.55% 472.217

TDC435 F3573 12/20/2019 0.8 16,334.891 2.50% 313.780

TDC435 F3574 12/20/2019 0.8 16,195.021 2.50% 308.095

TDC435 F3575 12/20/2019 0.8 16,343.695 2.59% 325.793

TDC435 F3576 12/20/2019 0.8 17,935.408 2.52% 349.494

TDC435 F3577 12/20/2019 0.8 20,224.598 2.49% 390.390

TDC435 F3578 12/20/2019 0.8 22,535.586 2.50% 430.673

TDC435 F3581 12/20/2019 0.8 19,366.869 2.40% 353.858

TDC435 F3582 12/20/2019 0.8 14,910.909 2.41% 276.902

TDC435 F3583 12/20/2019 0.8 13,549.894 2.56% 270.992

TDC435 F3584 12/20/2019 0.8 23,041.872 2.56% 454.164

TDC435 F3585 12/20/2019 0.8 25,506.924 2.07% 409.158

TDC435 F3586 12/20/2019 0.8 27,129.947 2.03% 426.668

TDC435 F3587 12/20/2019 0.8 17,191.211 2.03% 270.604

TDC435 F3588 12/20/2019 0.8 20,600.137 2.05% 330.691

Page 20




Baseline (MWh)

Average Voltage

Reduction (%)


TDC444 J4401 11/27/2019 0.8 19,529.323 4.30% 650.624

TDC444 J4402 11/27/2019 0.8 12,465.382 4.27% 411.490

TDC444 J4403 11/27/2019 0.8 26,267.199 4.31% 871.244

TDC444 J4405 11/27/2019 0.8 21,408.384 3.85% 635.257

TDC444 J4409 11/27/2019 0.8 23,382.331 3.88% 699.380

TDC444 J4410 11/27/2019 0.8 22,943.171 3.86% 685.469

TDC446 F461 9/9/2019 0.8 9,510.456 3.06% 217.718

TDC446 F462 9/9/2019 0.8 17,736.142 3.09% 408.685

TDC446 F463 9/9/2019 0.8 23,359.731 3.11% 547.513

TDC446 F465 9/9/2019 0.8 22,269.734 4.08% 682.106

TDC446 F466 9/9/2019 0.8 17,732.572 4.12% 550.393

TDC446 F467 9/9/2019 0.8 11,691.475 4.12% 354.420

TDC446 F4674 9/9/2019 0.8 15,960.866 3.05% 358.023

TDC446 F4675 9/9/2019 0.8 13,721.237 3.05% 309.338

TDC446 F4681 9/9/2019 0.8 20,824.597 4.12% 641.324

TDC446 F4684 9/9/2019 0.8 20,175.165 4.10% 617.292

TDC469 G6971 8/30/2019 0.8 24,773.712 4.02% 760.096

TDC469 G6972 8/30/2019 0.8 20,547.431 4.05% 640.261

TDC469 G6973 8/30/2019 0.8 23,312.296 4.07% 740.299

TDC469 G6974 8/30/2019 0.8 22,587.335 4.10% 708.116

TDC469 G6975 8/30/2019 0.8 19,647.075 4.04% 614.881

TDC469 G6976 8/30/2019 0.8 18,402.343 4.04% 568.044

TDC469 G6977 8/30/2019 0.8 5,382.511 3.78% 156.486

TDC469 G6979 8/30/2019 0.8 17,792.035 3.70% 502.803

TDC469 G6980 8/30/2019 0.8 15,118.217 3.62% 408.063

TDC469 G6983 8/30/2019 0.8 19,493.384 3.70% 556.390

TDC469 G6984 8/30/2019 0.8 22,325.283 3.71% 636.989

TDC499 J9901 12/5/2019 0.8 30,340.864 4.66% 1072.480

TDC499 J9902 12/5/2019 0.8 19,214.085 4.66% 682.362

TDC499 J9903 12/5/2019 0.8 21,391.081 4.67% 755.042

TDC499 J9904 12/5/2019 0.8 26,248.035 4.65% 942.488

TDC499 J9905 12/5/2019 0.8 19,322.095 4.55% 676.484

TDC499 J9906 12/5/2019 0.8 11,820.324 4.53% 414.172

TDC499 J9907 12/5/2019 0.8 18,709.655 4.61% 665.529

TDC499 J9909 12/5/2019 0.8 20,369.373 4.61% 721.499

TDC499 J9910 12/5/2019 0.8 28,046.767 4.61% 990.959

TDC499 J9911 12/5/2019 0.8 12,477.214 4.58% 439.001

Page 21




Baseline (MWh)

Average Voltage

Reduction (%)


TDC510 W1031 11/8/2019 0.8 16,879.402 4.52% 578.661

TDC510 W1032 11/8/2019 0.8 22,566.419 4.53% 762.861

TDC510 W1036 11/8/2019 0.8 17,871.237 4.50% 613.183

TDC510 W1039 11/8/2019 0.8 28,217.861 4.44% 944.676

TDC517 D1778 10/31/2019 0.8 17,593.693 3.08% 418.045

TDC517 D1779 10/31/2019 0.8 18,008.635 3.09% 427.899

TDC517 D1781 10/31/2019 0.8 31,742.749 3.09% 752.275

TDC517 D1782 10/31/2019 0.8 14,887.459 3.07% 350.598

TDC517 D1783 10/31/2019 0.8 19,834.692 3.07% 464.390

TDC517 D1784 10/31/2019 0.8 5,977.631 3.07% 141.405

TDC517 D1786 10/31/2019 0.8 21,555.418 1.43% 219.013

TDC517 D1787 10/31/2019 0.8 20,323.304 1.45% 209.017

TDC517 D1792 10/31/2019 0.8 26,137.855 1.44% 269.200

TDC517 D1793 10/31/2019 0.8 5,756.995 1.46% 63.069

TDC550 D5001 11/27/2019 0.8 19,862.217 2.35% 357.217

TDC550 D5003 11/27/2019 0.8 17,773.180 2.47% 340.043

TDC550 D5004 11/27/2019 0.8 29,652.884 2.76% 634.634

TDC550 D5005 11/27/2019 0.8 30,804.555 2.46% 593.128

TDC550 D5006 11/27/2019 0.8 23,791.437 2.73% 507.334

TDC550 D5007 11/27/2019 0.8 11,829.865 2.46% 227.336

TDC550 D5008 11/27/2019 0.8 15,064.889 2.51% 292.569

TDC550 D5009 11/27/2019 0.8 27,861.520 2.49% 543.493

TDC550 D5010 11/27/2019 0.8 26,199.661 2.55% 527.058

TDC550 D5011 11/27/2019 0.8 17,138.321 2.54% 339.306

TDC550 D5012 11/27/2019 0.8 15,101.803 2.55% 298.453

TDC550 D5013 11/27/2019 0.8 25,530.242 3.65% 711.548

TDC550 D5014 11/27/2019 0.8 14,428.088 3.67% 403.101

TDC550 D5015 11/27/2019 0.8 29,531.265 3.70% 829.398

TDC550 D5016 11/27/2019 0.8 18,814.666 3.62% 520.489

TDC550 D5017 11/27/2019 0.8 10,145.738 3.79% 295.056

TDC550 D5018 11/27/2019 0.8 12,496.851 3.78% 359.838

TDC552 W5202 5/24/2019 0.8 23,564.491 2.95% 535.387

TDC552 W5203 5/24/2019 0.8 14,617.184 2.68% 303.261

TDC552 W5204 5/24/2019 0.8 27,280.078 2.72% 568.937

TDC552 W5205 5/24/2019 0.8 15,896.200 2.89% 347.900

TDC552 W5206 5/24/2019 0.8 14,832.966 3.09% 355.760

TDC552 W5208 5/24/2019 0.8 19,674.282 3.11% 478.380

Page 22




Baseline (MWh)

Average Voltage

Reduction (%)


TDC552 W5209 5/24/2019 0.8 15,403.126 3.09% 369.830

TDC552 W5210 5/24/2019 0.8 14,407.677 3.09% 344.501

TDC559 W590 10/31/2019 0.8 16,030.387 4.59% 574.621

TDC559 W591 10/31/2019 0.8 16,916.077 4.61% 607.546

TDC559 W5910 10/31/2019 0.8 10,055.350 3.80% 295.927

TDC559 W5911 10/31/2019 0.8 12,986.251 4.60% 465.167

TDC559 W592 10/31/2019 0.8 14,783.333 4.59% 529.876

TDC559 W593 10/31/2019 0.8 13,717.524 3.78% 402.430

TDC559 W594 10/31/2019 0.8 11,035.547 3.79% 322.975

TDC559 W595 10/31/2019 0.8 11,949.624 3.82% 349.972

TDC559 W596 10/31/2019 0.8 8,340.722 3.83% 253.992

TDC559 W597 10/31/2019 0.8 14,040.731 3.82% 410.981

TDC559 W598 10/31/2019 0.8 25,088.371 4.61% 894.216

TDC559 W599 10/31/2019 0.8 19,618.450 4.62% 702.389

TDC568 W680 6/26/2019 0.8 4,669.495 4.00% 142.134

TDC568 W681 6/26/2019 0.8 19,876.199 4.00% 609.391

TDC568 W682 6/26/2019 0.8 23,445.759 3.99% 715.999

TDC568 W683 6/26/2019 0.8 21,956.254 4.00% 671.242

TDC568 W684 6/26/2019 0.8 14,713.150 3.56% 388.482

TDC568 W685 6/26/2019 0.8 547.977 3.58% 14.657

TDC568 W686 6/26/2019 0.8 16,049.447 3.55% 425.588

TDC568 W687 6/26/2019 0.8 18,035.000 3.55% 483.201

TDC568 W688 6/26/2019 0.8 22,572.021 3.56% 606.294

TDC568 W689 6/26/2019 0.8 17,537.061 3.55% 463.615

TDC595 W9501 11/27/2019 0.8 23,591.673 3.31% 603.248

TDC595 W9502 11/27/2019 0.8 14,272.098 3.31% 369.347

TDC595 W9503 11/27/2019 0.8 17,503.041 3.31% 441.143

TDC595 W9504 11/27/2019 0.8 16,650.674 3.31% 428.917

TDC595 W9505 11/27/2019 0.8 20,773.483 3.31% 527.955

TDC595 W9506 11/27/2019 0.8 13,312.501 3.30% 345.002

TDC595 W9507 11/27/2019 0.8 15,925.238 3.18% 395.000

TDC595 W9508 11/27/2019 0.8 18,649.750 3.27% 473.244

TDC595 W9509 11/27/2019 0.8 20,984.188 3.27% 528.053

TDC595 W9510 11/27/2019 0.8 18,574.033 3.26% 471.770

TDC595 W9511 11/27/2019 0.8 15,207.030 3.26% 386.254

TDC595 W9512 11/27/2019 0.8 28,506.012 3.26% 714.049

TDC595 W9513 11/27/2019 0.8 20,680.575 3.16% 507.825

Page 23




Baseline (MWh)

Average Voltage

Reduction (%)


TDC595 W9514 11/27/2019 0.8 23,640.361 3.16% 579.299

TDC595 W9515 11/27/2019 0.8 14,171.980 3.16% 350.831

TDC595 W9516 11/27/2019 0.8 15,093.233 3.16% 368.711

TDC595 W9517 11/27/2019 0.8 38,679.605 3.16% 945.390

TDC595 W9518 11/27/2019 0.8 18,979.117 3.15% 464.186

TDC595 W9519 11/27/2019 0.8 11,643.136 3.15% 287.938

TDC595 W9520 11/27/2019 0.8 14,135.611 3.14% 345.903

TDC595 W9521 11/27/2019 0.8 17,102.444 3.17% 419.408

TDC595 W9522 11/27/2019 0.8 38,417.013 3.28% 973.882

TDC595 W9523 11/27/2019 0.8 14,626.366 3.19% 367.510

TDC595 W9524 11/27/2019 0.8 18,867.121 3.17% 459.894

TDC595 W9525 11/27/2019 0.8 25,974.514 3.28% 655.940

TSS111 W1131 11/27/2019 0.8 14,319.640 3.97% 431.420

TSS111 W1132 11/27/2019 0.8 29,079.518 3.98% 868.693

TSS111 W1133 11/27/2019 0.8 19,663.246 3.86% 585.074

TSS111 W1134 11/27/2019 0.8 25,424.827 3.85% 743.762

TSS111 W1135 11/27/2019 0.8 28,779.769 3.98% 870.342

TSS111 W1136 11/27/2019 0.8 12,835.664 3.85% 383.633

TSS111 W1137 11/27/2019 0.8 16,956.834 3.98% 520.004

TSS137 Z13731 1/25/2019 0.8 22,811.475 2.92% 506.301

TSS137 Z13733 1/25/2019 0.8 17,925.144 2.93% 404.627

TSS137 Z13734 1/25/2019 0.8 22,627.829 2.96% 514.468

TSS137 Z13735 1/25/2019 0.8 24,259.538 2.92% 542.984

TSS137 Z13736 1/25/2019 0.8 18,690.439 2.83% 404.153

TSS137 Z13737 1/25/2019 0.8 17,770.438 2.93% 399.641

TSS137 Z13746 1/25/2019 0.8 16,502.566 2.94% 373.552

TSS137 Z13750 1/25/2019 0.8 21,622.706 2.94% 487.288

TSS137 Z13751 1/25/2019 0.8 17,937.031 2.93% 400.187

TSS137 Z13752 1/25/2019 0.8 19,076.000 2.94% 428.616

TSS137 Z13753 1/25/2019 0.8 25,504.621 2.92% 574.728

TSS137 Z13754 1/25/2019 0.8 25,624.518 2.95% 578.024

TSS137 Z13755 1/25/2019 0.8 23,579.753 2.92% 525.410

TSS137 Z13757 1/25/2019 0.8 27,890.358 2.90% 619.135

TSS137 Z13758 1/25/2019 0.8 29,007.859 2.95% 659.842

TSS137 Z13759 1/25/2019 0.8 18,434.209 2.95% 416.574

TSS137 Z13760 1/25/2019 0.8 25,605.546 2.94% 574.899

TSS137 Z13761 1/25/2019 0.8 30,562.850 2.92% 685.321

Page 24




Baseline (MWh)

Average Voltage

Reduction (%)


TSS137 Z13763 1/25/2019 0.8 18,074.206 2.71% 375.633

TSS137 Z13765 1/25/2019 0.8 22,003.143 2.77% 467.288

TSS137 Z13766 1/25/2019 0.8 11,046.920 2.72% 231.714

TSS137 Z13767 1/25/2019 0.8 20,136.302 2.77% 431.134

TSS137 Z13768 1/25/2019 0.8 23,055.226 2.77% 490.935

TSS137 Z13769 1/25/2019 0.8 17,995.399 2.73% 376.933

TSS137 Z13778 1/25/2019 0.8 28,470.125 2.75% 602.919

TSS137 Z13779 1/25/2019 0.8 16,602.987 2.74% 345.784

TSS137 Z13781 1/25/2019 0.8 28,663.415 2.74% 607.259

TSS137 Z13783 1/25/2019 0.8 11,307.051 2.93% 257.090

TSS137 Z13785 1/25/2019 0.8 26,237.917 2.77% 565.013

TSS137 Z13786 1/25/2019 0.8 25,333.258 2.76% 537.288

TSS137 Z13787 1/25/2019 0.8 18,944.032 2.76% 407.443

TSS137 Z13789 1/25/2019 0.8 20,264.255 2.74% 427.896

TSS137 Z13790 1/25/2019 0.8 18,199.944 2.78% 392.199

TSS137 Z13791 1/25/2019 0.8 18,965.223 2.77% 410.042

TSS137 Z13792 1/25/2019 0.8 20,111.959 2.76% 428.906

TSS137 Z13793 1/25/2019 0.8 19,846.125 2.77% 424.991

TSS151 E511 5/24/2019 0.8 23,174.277 2.37% 431.992

TSS151 E5112 5/24/2019 0.8 23,011.613 2.38% 429.555

TSS151 E5113 5/24/2019 0.8 14,702.852 2.34% 271.080

TSS151 E5116 5/24/2019 0.8 14,332.177 2.38% 267.756

TSS151 E514 5/24/2019 0.8 20,842.903 2.39% 391.056

TSS172 C720 9/27/2019 0.8 14,582.841 3.11% 343.511

TSS172 C721 9/27/2019 0.8 12,139.274 3.12% 288.862

TSS172 C7210 9/27/2019 0.8 16,698.851 3.18% 405.395

TSS172 C7211 9/27/2019 0.8 24,774.715 2.95% 556.093

TSS172 C7212 9/27/2019 0.8 22,915.136 3.13% 541.401

TSS172 C7213 9/27/2019 0.8 15,461.233 3.18% 370.536

TSS172 C7214 9/27/2019 0.8 15,666.227 3.18% 374.232

TSS172 C7215 9/27/2019 0.8 17,331.094 3.11% 406.334

TSS172 C7216 9/27/2019 0.8 14,115.016 3.13% 337.120

TSS172 C7217X 9/27/2019 0.8 18,639.143 2.92% 419.775

TSS172 C7217Y 9/27/2019 0.8 16,782.820 2.92% 372.138

TSS172 C7218 9/27/2019 0.8 11,491.730 3.18% 277.938

TSS172 C7219 9/27/2019 0.8 13,976.954 2.92% 309.085

TSS172 C722 9/27/2019 0.8 13,568.514 2.95% 304.432

Page 25




Baseline (MWh)

Average Voltage

Reduction (%)


TSS172 C7220 9/27/2019 0.8 27,532.277 2.92% 610.019

TSS172 C7221 9/27/2019 0.8 19,712.710 2.92% 436.742

TSS172 C7222 9/27/2019 0.8 24,920.335 2.92% 558.494

TSS172 C7223 9/27/2019 0.8 21,434.876 2.95% 481.722

TSS172 C7224 9/27/2019 0.8 22,223.688 3.12% 522.885

TSS172 C7225 9/27/2019 0.8 21,448.878 2.92% 476.230

TSS172 C7226 9/27/2019 0.8 16,366.434 2.92% 361.067

TSS172 C723 9/27/2019 0.8 13,995.108 3.11% 327.872

TSS172 C724 9/27/2019 0.8 15,130.816 2.95% 335.945

TSS172 C725 9/27/2019 0.8 14,060.738 2.91% 311.919

TSS172 C726X 9/27/2019 0.8 9,137.312 3.11% 213.441

TSS172 C726Y 9/27/2019 0.8 15,196.978 3.11% 361.644

TSS172 C727 9/27/2019 0.8 23,030.241 3.11% 537.943

TSS172 C728 9/27/2019 0.8 12,880.584 2.95% 289.019

TSS172 C729 9/27/2019 0.8 24,235.063 3.18% 581.673

TSS174 Z17431 4/30/2019 0.8 19,049.759 1.15% 166.803

TSS174 Z17432 4/30/2019 0.8 21,684.516 1.16% 192.994

TSS174 Z17434 4/30/2019 0.8 19,083.211 1.15% 165.014

TSS174 Z17435 4/30/2019 0.8 16,641.747 1.14% 151.549

TSS174 Z17437 4/30/2019 0.8 26,958.446 1.16% 243.760

TSS174 Z17439 4/30/2019 0.8 30,476.501 1.16% 262.730

TSS174 Z17440 4/30/2019 0.8 18,907.992 1.15% 163.794

TSS174 Z17441 4/30/2019 0.8 21,302.464 1.15% 185.277

TSS174 Z17443 4/30/2019 0.8 17,809.812 1.27% 173.706

TSS174 Z17445 4/30/2019 0.8 22,480.330 1.10% 187.210

TSS174 Z17446 4/30/2019 0.8 17,365.113 1.28% 168.461

TSS174 Z17448 4/30/2019 0.8 21,266.836 1.27% 205.279

TSS174 Z17450 4/30/2019 0.8 27,611.654 1.28% 268.357

TSS174 Z17451 4/30/2019 0.8 27,495.736 1.27% 267.006

TSS174 Z17452 4/30/2019 0.8 19,591.641 1.27% 190.935

TSS174 Z17454 4/30/2019 0.8 26,296.806 1.25% 251.847

TSS174 Z17455 4/30/2019 0.8 14,189.086 1.25% 135.426

TSS174 Z17457 4/30/2019 0.8 33,336.090 1.25% 322.254

TSS174 Z17458 4/30/2019 0.8 20,709.430 1.25% 199.955

TSS174 Z17459 4/30/2019 0.8 19,690.626 1.25% 188.456

TSS174 Z17461 4/30/2019 0.8 22,914.029 1.24% 216.991

TSS174 Z17464 4/30/2019 0.8 22,063.381 1.24% 210.357

Page 26




Baseline (MWh)

Average Voltage

Reduction (%)


TSS174 Z17465 4/30/2019 0.8 21,113.621 1.24% 199.626

TSS174 Z17466 4/30/2019 0.8 21,864.995 1.11% 185.205

TSS174 Z17467 4/30/2019 0.8 18,399.761 1.11% 159.135

TSS174 Z17468 4/30/2019 0.8 16,188.019 1.12% 133.817

TSS174 Z17469 4/30/2019 0.8 26,312.953 1.11% 224.366

TSS174 Z17470 4/30/2019 0.8 15,123.058 1.09% 126.195

TSS174 Z17472 4/30/2019 0.8 3,172.841 1.22% 28.341

TSS174 Z17473 4/30/2019 0.8 20,417.896 1.19% 187.296

TSS174 Z17474 4/30/2019 0.8 25,808.060 1.12% 229.261

TSS174 Z17475 4/30/2019 0.8 15,675.594 1.20% 134.640

TSS174 Z17476 4/30/2019 0.8 22,911.009 1.21% 210.175

TSS174 Z17477 4/30/2019 0.8 18,724.473 1.26% 177.816

TSS33 Z3331 10/23/2019 0.8 19,161.917 1.81% 259.232

TSS33 Z3332 10/23/2019 0.8 22,313.814 1.81% 305.124

TSS33 Z3333 11/8/2019 0.8 12,043.859 1.18% 104.443

TSS33 Z3334 10/23/2019 0.8 18,657.349 1.77% 245.747

TSS33 Z3335 11/8/2019 0.8 14,461.056 1.26% 131.397

TSS33 Z3336 11/8/2019 0.8 27,096.056 1.50% 292.878

TSS33 Z3337 11/8/2019 0.8 21,589.805 1.47% 220.315

TSS33 Z3338 11/8/2019 0.8 27,843.604 1.48% 283.097

TSS33 Z3339 11/8/2019 0.8 13,408.685 1.32% 130.409

TSS33 Z3340 11/8/2019 0.8 25,048.837 1.49% 261.758

TSS33 Z3341 11/8/2019 0.8 28,370.517 1.39% 295.698

TSS33 Z3345 10/23/2019 0.8 5,969.200 1.73% 77.748

TSS33 Z3346 10/23/2019 0.8 19,292.507 1.78% 258.006

TSS33 Z3347 10/23/2019 0.8 18,436.515 1.87% 262.983

TSS33 Z3348 10/23/2019 0.8 22,979.834 1.89% 322.815

TSS33 Z3349 10/23/2019 0.8 22,807.281 1.77% 302.800

TSS33 Z3350 10/23/2019 0.8 3,880.663 1.85% 53.546

TSS33 Z3351 10/23/2019 0.8 36,319.580 1.87% 512.423

TSS33 Z3352 10/23/2019 0.8 17,194.547 1.82% 237.205

TSS89 Z8931 11/28/2019 0.8 24,220.190 1.86% 349.045

TSS89 Z8932 11/28/2019 0.8 12,355.435 1.87% 178.948

TSS89 Z8933X 11/28/2019 0.8 18,778.902 1.89% 273.219

TSS89 Z8933Y 11/28/2019 0.8 20,134.356 1.85% 304.899

TSS89 Z8934 11/28/2019 0.8 23,103.609 1.85% 328.362

TSS89 Z8935 11/28/2019 0.8 20,186.048 1.87% 295.514

Page 27




Baseline (MWh)

Average Voltage

Reduction (%)


TSS89 Z8936 11/28/2019 0.8 18,515.139 2.18% 312.402

TSS89 Z8937 11/28/2019 0.8 18,485.589 2.07% 296.802

TSS89 Z8939 11/28/2019 0.8 24,177.550 2.13% 395.987

TSS89 Z8940 11/28/2019 0.8 17,187.726 2.08% 272.595

TSS89 Z8941 11/28/2019 0.8 24,027.277 2.12% 389.913

TSS89 Z8942 11/28/2019 0.8 19,012.422 2.14% 315.087

TSS89 Z8943 11/28/2019 0.8 12,713.086 2.15% 209.469

TSS89 Z8944 11/28/2019 0.8 13,192.411 2.14% 216.299

TSS89 Z8945 11/28/2019 0.8 13,634.372 2.15% 226.261

TSS89 Z8946 11/28/2019 0.8 21,511.027 2.13% 354.691

TSS89 Z8947 11/28/2019 0.8 22,816.411 2.13% 368.702

TSS89 Z8948 11/28/2019 0.8 5,552.198 1.70% 73.028

TSS89 Z8949 11/28/2019 0.8 18,679.614 1.72% 247.067

TSS89 Z8950 11/28/2019 0.8 14,754.620 1.64% 181.919

Total172,573.52

6* Two feeders (W258 and C162Y) did not have enough data for reconstruction. Guidehouse assigned these feeders the average of all other feeders.Source: Evaluation team analysis

Table 8-7. CY2019 VO RRs by Substation

Substation


Ex-Ante Energy Saving

s (MWh)

Realization Rate

DCA37 530.427 1,042 0.51

DCB96 718.359 602 1.19

DCC21 183.247 325 0.56

DCC25 461.601 324 1.42

DCC61 859.000 961 0.89

DCC66 638.798 459 1.39

DCC85 430.087 679 0.63

DCD20 407.429 672 0.61

DCD351 812.892 780 1.04

DCD40 1,523.468 1,779 0.86

DCD46 686.316 784 0.88

DCE16 1,230.872 1,420 0.87

DCE17 389.361 683 0.57

DCE29 1,041.169 1,471 0.71

Page 28


Substation



s (MWh)

Realization Rate

DCE35 1,031.916 1,658 0.62

DCE46 457.842 614 0.75

DCE79 374.071 467 0.80

DCE8 1,113.049 1,391 0.80

DCF45 1,442.976 965 1.50

DCG121 536.145 732 0.73

DCG42 770.235 914 0.84

DCG88 581.334 725 0.80

DCG909 116.279 333 0.35

DCH27 681.556 714 0.95

DCH56 278.825 387 0.72

DCH65 308.203 1,129 0.27

DCH76 291.910 720 0.41

DCH78 1,426.794 1,359 1.05

DCJ19 1,152.587 1,406 0.82

DCJ87 607.612 927 0.66

DCS67 312.285 570 0.55

DCW115 1,036.110 1,458 0.71

DCW119 965.047 1,045 0.92

DCW148 1,458.148 1,209 1.21

DCW25 447.082 874 0.51

DCW304 522.505 1,328 0.39

DCW41 715.850 959 0.75

DCW44 569.052 1,176 0.48

DCW46 531.495 1,260 0.42

DCW50 1,888.539 2,255 0.84

DCW51 674.426 1,531 0.44

SS311 451.971 606 0.75

SS459 878.881 1,554 0.57

SS513 2,429.115 2,214 1.10

SS553 808.565 1,297 0.62

TDC205 7,440.137 5,298 1.40

TDC216 6,424.819 7,474 0.86

TDC317 2,453.944 2,437 1.01

TDC372 2,040.082 3,145 0.65

TDC435 5,662.828 653 8.67

TDC444 3,953.465 3,473 1.14

Page 29


Substation



s (MWh)

Realization Rate

TDC446 4,686.814 628 7.46

TDC469 6,292.428 7,388 0.85

TDC499 7,360.017 6,894 1.07

TDC510 2,899.381 1,566 1.85

TDC517 3,314.912 5,940 0.56

TDC550 7,780.000 9,564 0.81

TDC552 3,303.955 5,427 0.61

TDC559 5,810.092 6,392 0.91

TDC568 4,520.604 5,031 0.90

TDC59512,410.70

0 14,810 0.84

TSS111 4,402.928 1,346 3.27

TSS13716,876.21

8 12,170 1.39

TSS151 1,791.441 4,576 0.39

TSS17211,713.46

6 18,696 0.63

TSS174 6,514.034 7,637 0.85

TSS33 4,557.624 6,924 0.66

TSS89 5,590.208 15,176 0.37

Total172,573.5

26 198,403 0.87Source: Evaluation team analysis

Guidehouse estimated average summer peak demand reduction from the pooled model of 54.3 kW per feeder per hour. Multiplying by the 386 feeders claimable in CY2019 brings the aggregate summer peak demand reduction across all feeders to 20,942 kW per hour (+/- 4,226 kW at a 90 percent confidence level). Across all feeders and peak period hours, Guidehouse found total summer peak period energy savings of 5,361,056 kWh (+/- 1,081,859 kWh at a 90 percent confidence level).

Guidehouse also estimated the voltage reduction during the summer peak period. We found an average voltage reduction across all feeders of 2.51%. Converting the demand savings to a percentage gives 1.83%. Dividing these two values gives an implied summer peak period CVR factor of 0.73.

Page 30


9. APPENDIX 3. TOTAL RESOURCE COST DETAIL

Table 9-8 shows the Total Resource Cost (TRC) cost-effectiveness analysis inputs available at the time of finalizing this impact evaluation report. Additional required cost data (e.g., measure costs, program level incentive and non-incentive costs) are not included in this table and will be provided to the evaluation team later.

Table 9-8. Total Resource Cost Savings Summary

End Use Type Research Category Units Quantity EUL (years)*

ER Flag†

Verified Gross Electric Energy

Savings (kWh)

Verified Gross Peak

Demand Reduction

(kW)

Verified Gross

Gas Savings

(Therms)

Gross Heating Penalty

(kWh)

Gross Heating Penalty

(Therms)

NTG (kWh)

NTG (kW)

NTG (Therms)

Verified Net Electric Energy

Savings (kWh)

Verified Net Peak Demand

Reduction (kW)

Verified Net Gas Savings

(Therms)

Net Heating Penalty

(kWh)

Net Heating Penalty

(Therms)

All VO Feeders 386 15.0 No 172,573,526 20,942.00 NA NA NA 1 1 NA 172,573,526 20,942.00 NA NA NA

Total NA 172,573,526 20,942 0 0 0 NA NA NA 172,573,526 20,942 0 0 0

NA = Not applicable* The total of the EUL column is the weighted average measure life (WAML), and is calculated as the sum product of EUL and measure savings divided by total program savings.† Early Replacement (ER) measures are flagged as YES, otherwise a NO is indicated in the column.Source: ComEd tracking data and evaluation team analysis

Page 31


10. APPENDIX 4. STIPULATION AGREEMENT

This section shows the text of Section II.7 of the Stipulation Agreement which describes the CY2019 VO evaluation methodology.

TEXT TO BE ADDED

Page 32

Date post:	07-May-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times

Introduction€¦ · Web view2020/03/14 · 272.595 TSS89 Z8941 11/28/2019 0.8 24,027.277 2.12%...

Documents