BEFORE THE MINNESOTA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION Katie J. Sieben Dan Lipschultz Valerie Means Matthew Schuerger John A. Tuma Chair Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner ISSUE DATE: December 12, 2019 In the Matter of a Commission Inquiry into Electric Vehicle Charging and Infrastructure DOCKET NO. E-999/CI-17-879 In the Matter of Xcel Energy’s Petition for Approval of a Residential Electric-Vehicle Service Pilot Program DOCKET NO. E-002/M-17-817 In the Matter of Northern States Power Company d/b/a Xcel Energy’s Petition for Approval of a Residential Electric Vehicle Charging Tariff DOCKET NO. E-002/M-15-111 In the Matter of Otter Tail Power Company’s Request for Approval of a Residential OffPeak Electric Vehicle Service Tariff DOCKET NO. E-017/M-15-112 In the Matter of Minnesota Power’s Petition for Approval of a Residential Off-Peak Electric Vehicle Service Tariff DOCKET NO. E-015/M-15-120 ORDER ACCEPTING FILINGS AND ESTABLISHING REQUIREMENTS FOR ADDITIONAL FILINGS PROCEDURAL HISTORY I. Electric Vehicle (EV) Inquiry On December 28, 2017, the Commission opened Docket No. E-999/CI-17-879, In the Matter of a Commission Inquiry into Electric Vehicle Charging and Infrastructure (the EV Inquiry), to gain a better understanding of the possible impacts of electric vehicles on the electric system, utilities, and customers; the potential extent and pace of EV adoption; and possible EV tariff options. On February 1, 2019, the Commission issued an order in the docket, making a number of general findings about transportation electrification, as well as specific findings on the role utilities should play in promoting EVs. Among other items, the Commission directed Minnesota Power, Otter Tail Power Company (Otter Tail), and Northern States Power Company d/b/a Xcel Energy (Xcel) to make several filings, including the following: 1 II. - By June 1, 2019, annual EV reports, including EV promotional cost recovery mechanisms.1 - By June 30, 2019, Transportation Electrification Plans (TEPs), identifying and discussing each utility’s planned EV initiatives. - By October 31, 2019, proposals “intended to enhance the availability of or access to charging infrastructure, increase consumer awareness of EV benefits, and/or facilitate managed charging or other mechanisms that optimize the incorporation of EVs into the electric system.”2 Annual EV reports On May 31, 2019, Minnesota Power, Otter Tail, and Xcel filed their annual EV reports for existing EV tariffs and pilot programs.3 On June 14, 2019, the Commission issued a Notice of Comment Period regarding the annual EV reports. Initial comments were accepted until July 15, utility responses to initial comments until July 25, and all reply comments until August 5. On July 15, 2019, the Minnesota Department of Commerce, Division of Energy Resources (the Department), filed comments recommending that the Commission accept each utility’s annual EV report. III. Transportation Electrification Plans On June 28, 2019, Xcel and Otter Tail filed their TEPs. On July 1, 2019, Minnesota Power filed its TEP. On July 8, 2019, the Commission filed a Notice of Comment Period regarding the TEPs. Topics for comment included whether the Commission should accept the submitted TEPs, whether additional TEPs should be required, and if so, whether the contents should be modified. Initial comments were accepted until July 31, utility responses to initial comments until August 12, and all reply comments until August 22. 1 The contents of annual EV reports are established by Minn. Stat. § 216B.1614, passed in 2014, and several subsequent Commission orders, including the February 1, 2019 order. See Comments of the Minnesota Department of Commerce, Division of Energy Resources, Docket Nos. E-002/M-15-111, E-002/M-17-817, E-017/M-15-112, and E-015/M-15-120 (July 15, 2019). 2 In the Matter of a Commission Inquiry into Electric Vehicle Charging and Infrastructure, Docket No. E-999/CI-17-879, Order Making Findings and Requiring Filings, at 13 (February 1, 2019). 3 Xcel filed EV reports in Docket Nos. E-002/M-15-111 (Residential Electric Vehicle Charging Tariff) and E-002/M-17-817 (Residential Electric Vehicle Service Pilot Program); Otter Tail filed an EV report in Docket No. E-017/M-15-112 (Residential Off-Peak Electric Vehicle Service Tariff); and Minnesota Power filed an EV report in Docket No. E-015/M-15-120 (Residential Off-Peak Electric Vehicle Service Tariff). 2 Between July 31 and August 22, the following parties filed initial and/or reply comments: IV. - Chargepoint, Inc. - Greenlots (initial comments only) - Xcel Large Industrials and Large Power Intervenors (XLI/LPI) - Minnesota Department of Commerce, Division of Energy Resources - Fresh Energy, Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy, Natural Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club, and Union of Concerned Scientists - City of Minneapolis (initial comments only) - Siemens - Xcel (reply comments only) - Otter Tail (reply comments only) - Minnesota Power (reply comments only) - Office of the Attorney General – Residential Utilities and Antitrust Division (OAG) (reply comments only) Additional program proposals On July 1, 2019, Minnesota Power filed its TEP as noted above. As part of the TEP, Minnesota Power stated that it had already submitted a proposal to the Commission for a commercial EV rate pilot program and that it was exploring potential programs relating to residential EV charging. On October 24, 2019, Otter Tail requested an extension of the October 31 deadline and proposed to file its proposals by December 12, 2019. On October 31, 2019, Xcel filed a list of its EV programs that had been approved by or submitted to the Commission between 2015 and 2019, including its August 30 proposal to expand its residential EV service pilot to a standard offering. V. Combined Commission meeting On October 31, 2019, the Commission met to consider the reports filed in the various dockets. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS I. Annual EV reports The Commission has reviewed each utility’s annual EV report and concurs with the Department that each report complies with the requirements of Commission orders and state statute. Consequently, the Commission will accept the annual reports submitted in Docket Nos. E-002/M-15-111, E-002/M-17-817, E-017/M-15-112, and E-015/M-15-120. The Commission will establish requirements for future reports in Docket Nos. E-002/M-15-111, E-017/M-15-112, and E-015/M-15-120, as described in the ordering paragraphs. Going forward, 3 the reporting requirements established in this order will replace the reporting requirements established in those prior orders; other existing requirements are eliminated or moved to the TEPs in order to streamline the reports and reduce redundancy. The Commission believes that these revised reporting requirements will provide valuable insights into the operation of the permanent EV tariffs while avoiding unnecessarily duplicative or burdensome filings. II. TEPs Most commenters recommended that the Commission accept the utilities’ initial TEPs and require ongoing TEPs on either an annual or biennial basis. A majority of parties that commented on the report frequency supported annual filings; Greenlots commented that biennial filings may be sufficient in the future, but at this early stage, annual reporting would be preferable. Several parties proposed additional reporting requirements, many of which were broadly supported by commenters, including reporting on various baseline EV system data and information on ongoing EV-related efforts. Parties were supportive of reporting requirements proposed by Commission staff, with minor modifications. Commission staff’s proposal included moving certain general reporting requirements from annual EV reports to the TEPs to avoid unnecessary duplication. Utilities noted that for some items, they may be able to provide only estimates or limited data due to technical limitations. In response, the Department suggested language that gives flexibility and directs utilities to provide an explanation when information is not available. Certain proposed reporting requirements were contested, largely because they would be logistically or technologically difficult for utilities to implement. For example, XLI/LPI proposed reporting on total costs and benefits of the TEPs; other parties opposed this suggestion, stating variously that a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis for transportation electrification efforts would be difficult, and that it is more appropriate to undertake cost-benefit analysis in individual program dockets. The Commission has reviewed the utilities’ TEPs and finds them to be complete. The Commission will accept the utilities’ initial TEPs, and will require additional TEPs to be filed annually with a deadline of June 1 to align with the existing deadline for annual EV reports. The Commission believes that timely updates are necessary in this rapidly-changing area, and that annual reports will allow the Commission to stay abreast of important developments. The Commission will establish reporting requirements for future TEPs as described in the ordering paragraphs, including most of the items that had consensus agreement among parties and the Department’s suggested language allowing for flexibility. The Commission believes that these report contents will provide a robust view of the utilities’ EV-related activity while avoiding unnecessarily burdensome reporting requirements. The Commission will not require reporting on total costs and benefits of the TEPs; the Commission believes that this would be difficult and of limited value, and that it is better to leave discussion of costs and benefits to individual dockets. 4 III. Additional program proposals Among other findings in its February 1, 2019 order, the Commission stated that “utilities should. . . [d]evelop and file EV-related proposals intended to encourage the adoption of EVs. . . .”4 Specifically, the Commission directed Minnesota Power, Otter Tail, and Xcel to file such proposals, in consultation with stakeholders, by October 31, 2019. A. Minnesota Power Minnesota Power stated that it had already filed EV-related proposals before the February 1 order. Additionally, Minnesota Power stated that it was in the process of developing an EV program addressing residential charging, and anticipated developing a proposal for a public charging program in the future. The Commission believes that Minnesota Power’s anticipated residential charging program is in alignment with the findings set out in its February 1, 2019 order, and that timely action on this program is needed. The Commission will direct Minnesota Power to file this proposal in the first half of 2020. B. Xcel Xcel stated that it had already filed EV-related proposals before the February 1 order, including its August 30 proposal to expand its residential EV service pilot to a standard offering.5 Environmental groups and the City of Minneapolis both commented on the importance of EV charging for multi-unit dwellings (MUDs), noting that although Xcel stated in its TEP that it was developing a MUD EV proposal, it did not provide detailed information and stated only that a proposal was anticipated in the next two years. Parties variously stated that an increasing number of people were living in MUDs, particularly in the city of Minneapolis; that a lack of charging infrastructure was a major barrier for customers living in MUDs; and that utilities had the necessary experience and technology to address these issues. The Commission agrees with commenters that EV charging for multi-unit dwellings is increasingly important, and timely advancements in this area are essential. The Commission will direct Xcel to file a pilot or program addressing EV charging in multi-unit dwellings within nine months. C. Otter Tail Otter Tail requested an extension until December 12, 2019, to file its EV pilot proposals, noting that it was in the process of developing a pilot program and rate structure, but that additional research was needed to ensure that the program would be feasible within its existing billing system. The Commission will grant the requested extension; the Commission anticipates that the relatively short extension will allow Otter Tail to file a well-developed, comprehensive proposal. 4 In the Matter of a Commission Inquiry into Electric Vehicle Charging and Infrastructure, Docket No. E-999/CI-17-879, Order Making Findings and Requiring Filings, at 11 (February 1, 2019). 5 In the Matter of Xcel Energy’s Petition for Approval of An Electric Vehicle Home Service Program, Docket No. E-002/M-19-559. 5 ORDER 1. The Commission accepts the 2019 Electric Vehicle Reports filed by Minnesota Power, Otter Tail Power, and Xcel Energy in Docket Nos. E-002/M-15-111, E-017/M-15-112, and E-015/M-15-120. 2. Utilities must include the following information in future reports filed in Docket Nos. E-002/M-15-111, E-017/M-15-112, and E-015/M-15-120. a. The amount of energy sold per time period, and number of customers on the rate, on a monthly basis. b. The number of customers choosing a renewable-source option. c. The status of the communications costs tracker account, if applicable, including a breakdown of costs by educational and outreach initiatives; where possible, a separation of costs used to promote specific EV programs versus EV adoption in general; and a brief description of the activities for which the Company has incurred costs. 3. The Commission accepts Xcel Energy’s first annual Residential EV Service Pilot report. 4. The Commission accepts Minnesota Power, Otter Tail Power, and Xcel Energy’s 2019 Transportation Electrification Plans. 5. In the first half of 2020, Minnesota Power must file at least one additional EV program addressing residential charging. 6. Within nine months of the issuance of this order, Xcel Energy must file a pilot or program addressing EV charging in multi-unit dwellings. 7. Starting on June 1, 2020, the utilities must file Transportation Electrification Plans annually. 8. In each annual Transportation Electrification Plan, utilities must provide the following information and data to the greatest extent practicable. For any instance in which the utility is not able to provide the information and data, or it is not practicable to do so, the utility must (1) explain why it is unable to provide the information and data; and (2) make a reasonable effort to provide an approximation of the required information and data. If the utility is unable to provide an approximation of the required information and data, the utility must provide the reason or reasons and explain whether it will be possible to provide the required information and data in the future. a. Number of EVs in service territory, by type where possible (e.g. light duty, transit, medium duty, heavy duty). b. Number of customers and vehicles on each off peak or managed charging rate, energy consumed, and average hourly load profiles by month. c. Level of demand (in kilowatts) resulting from electric vehicles during each hour of the day, or if not yet available, during each time period in a utility’s time-differentiated tariff, for each electric vehicle tariff offered by the utility. 6 d. Consumption of electricity (in kilowatt-hours) by electric vehicles during each hour of the day, or if not yet available, during each time period in a utility’s time-differentiated tariff, for each electric vehicle tariff offered by the utility. e. Number and capacity of known Level 2 Charging Stations (public, and any enrolled in a utility program). f. Number and capacity of direct current fast charging (DCFC) stations (including breakout of DCFC installed through a utility program). g. Any system upgrades performed to accommodate EV charging, total costs paid by utility and by customer, and average cost per upgrade. Cost should be reported separately for the following customer groups: Residential, Government Fleet, Private Fleet, and Public Charging. h. EV adoption forecast scenarios (low, likely, high) by sector (residential, medium duty, and heavy duty). i. EV load forecast scenarios (low, likely, high) for capacity and energy, by sector (residential, medium duty, and heavy duty). j. A summary of the utility’s ongoing transportation electrification efforts, including existing programs and projects in development over at least the next 2 years. k. How the utility plans to facilitate: i. availability and awareness of public charging infrastructure, including an assessment of the private sector fast charging marketplace for the utility’s service territory; ii. availability of residential charging options for both single family and multiple unit dwellings; iii. programs or tariffs in development to address flexible load or reduce metering and data costs; and iv. fleet electrification. l. A summary of customer EV education initiatives. Utilities need not include specific examples of outreach materials. m. How the utility plans to optimize EV benefits, including a discussion of how to align charging with periods of lower customer demand and higher renewable energy production and by improving grid management and overall system utilization/efficiency. n. Summaries of any proposals or pilots, including links to full reports, submitted to other regulatory agencies or jurisdictions (for example, proposals submitted under Conservation Improvement Programs or pilots run in other states). o. Attachments or links to the most recent reports for any ongoing EV pilots or programs. 7 9. The Commission delegates authority to the Executive Secretary to establish final report formatting and to clean up any inconsistencies between various existing reporting requirements in individual dockets. 10. The Commission grants Otter Tail Power an extension until December 12, 2019, to file its EV pilot proposals. 11. This order shall become effective immediately. BY ORDER OF THE COMMISSION Daniel P. Wolf Executive Secretary This document can be made available in alternative formats (e.g., large print or audio) by calling 651.296.0406 (voice). Persons with hearing or speech impairment may call using their preferred Telecommunications Relay Service or email consumer.puc@state.mn.us for assistance. 8