Appendix H-1-3 Class Specific Regression Model Statistics

Similar documents
Table 1: Distribution Revenue at Current Rates. PowerStream Consolidated 2009 OEB Approved PS South 2009 Actual 2010 Actual 2011 Actual

2 CDM Adjustment for the Load Forecast for Distributors 2 1 Accuracy of the Load Forecast and Variance Analysis 3 1 Distribution and Other Revenue

Integrating Solar and Net Zero Homes. EFG May 2016

LOADS, CUSTOMERS AND REVENUE

FORECASTING PV MARKET ADOPTION AND DEMAND IMPACTS

Exhibit 3 Load and Other Revenue Forecast

Electric Forward Market Report

Woking. q business confidence report

California Independent System Operator Corporation. California ISO. Import resource adequacy. Department of Market Monitoring

NJ Solar Market Update

Sales Forecast for Rossmann Stores SUBMITTED BY: GROUP A-8

NJ Solar Market Update

Sample Report Market Sensitivity 30 Year, Fixed, Conforming Mortgages

Administration Division Public Works Department Anchorage: Performance. Value. Results.

University of Michigan Eco-Driving Index (EDI) Latest data: August 2017

PORTFOLIO OPTIMIZATION MODEL FOR ELECTRICITY PURCHASE IN LIBERALIZED ENERGY MARKETS

TransCanada Power Market Update February 2018

Outlook for Natural Gas Demand for Winter

Appendix 3A Water Demand Projections

Traffic Division Public Works Department Anchorage: Performance. Value. Results.

Is More Always Better? A Comparison of Billing Regression Results Using Monthly, Daily and Hourly AMI Data

FERC/RTO Training Session Institute for Policy Integrity New York University School of Law June 15, 2011

Department of Transportation Rapid City Region Office 2300 Eglin Street P.O. Box 1970 Rapid City, SD Phone: 605/ FAX: 605/

MATERIALS AND SUPPLIES INVENTORY

EVALUATION OF THE IMPACT OF SUB METERING ON MULTI RESIDENTIAL ELECTRICITY CONSUMPTION AND THE POTENTIAL ECONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ON ONTARIO

TransCanada Power Market Update January 2018

Traffic Department Anchorage: Performance. Value. Results.

Wind Update. Renewable Energy Integration Lessons Learned. March 28, 2012

Electricity Supply. Monthly Energy Grid Output by Fuel Type (MWh)

Lucas Finco NY INFORMS October 2014

21,363 MW 22,774 MW ONTARIO ENERGY REPORT Q JULY SEPT 2014 ELECTRICITY. Electricity Highlights Third Quarter Ontario s Power Grid

2001 Annual Report on the New York Electricity Markets

Operations Report. Stephanie Monzon Manager, Markets Coordination Operating Committee July 10, PJM 2018

Operations Report. Stephanie Monzon Manager, Markets Coordination MC Webinar January 22, PJM 2018

CitiPower Amended Revised Proposed Tariff Structure Statement

CO2, SO2 and NOX Emission Rates. March 15, 2018

Effects of projected climate change on energy supply and demand in the Pacific Northwest and Washington State

Peter Randall Solar Kingdom Ltd

Do Customers Respond to Real-Time Usage Feedback? Evidence from Singapore

Operations Report. Hong Chen Senior Lead Engineer, Markets Coordination Members Committee October 22, PJM 2018

CHP Managing Commodity Price Risk

CI User Engagement Activities and Schedule Nov Apr 2013

CCA Pilot Project Update

QUIDPRO. I. General Model Description

Sustaining Our Buildings & Grounds

ENERGY MANAGEMENT PLAN - HEADQUARTERS. ABC Winery 123 1st Street Franklin, NJ 12345

Southwest Texas Junior College

TL 9000 Quality Management System. Measurements Handbook. BRR Examples

ONTARIO ENERGY REPORT Q1 2015

Managing Energy Use and Cost with Integrated Metering

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

City of San Clemente Water Usage Report

Rainwater Harvesting

Zero Energy House in Japan: Actual results and future target. Isamu Ohta Misawa Homes Institute of Research & Development CO., LTD.

Clean Energy Extension

The Future of Electricity: A Market with Costs of Zero? Marginal

A Bulk Energy Storage Resource Case Study with 40% RPS in 2024

Allstream Centre Energy Performance Report

Water planning and climate change: actionable intelligence yet?

Energy Report - February 2008

Energy Savings Analysis Generated by a Real Time Energy Management System for Water Distribution

CO2, SO2 and NOX Emission Rates. August 21, 2015

1. Introduction Background Purpose Scope of the Tariff Structure Statement... 3

Chapter 6 Planning and Controlling Production: Work-in-Process and Finished-Good Inventories. Omar Maguiña Rivero

Utility Bill Data Accounts Payable s Secret Weapon for Managing Costs and Addressing Stakeholder Questions

Solar Thermal Optimization for District Hot Water through Energy Modeling

2017 KEY INSIGHTS ON. Employee Attendance and Tardiness

Draft 2011 Long-term Transmission Plan. Stakeholder Session June 20, 2011

Reconciliation of produced grade and tonnage

The Future of Electricity: A Market with Costs of Zero? Marginal

TVA Melton Hill Dam Sustainable Recreation Area

ERCOT Public LTRA Probabilistic Reliability Assessment. Final Report

Integrated Hourly Electricity Demand Forecast For Ontario

CIP Routine/Small Purchasing Team Close-out

The Texas Experience: Implications of 8,000+ MW Wind Generation Resources In ERCOT. David Campbell CEO, Luminant 2009 Summer Seminar August 3, 2009

MARKET MATTERS HVDC UTILISATION REPORT OCTOBER 2018

System Needs: An Energy Planning Perspective. Randy Reimann

Klaus Wewering. ACER Workshop CBA 2.0. Improving the pan-european cost-benefit analysis methodology 10 May 2016

A New Type of Hybrid Groundwater Energy System

Healthcare Facilities: Planning for Increasing Extreme Heat Events

FLEXIBILITY HOW TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE STABILITY OF THE GRID THANKS TO THE FLEXIBILITY OF YOUR PRODUCTION PROCESSES?

Thailand Power Development Plan ( ) TANONGSAK WONGLA

Final Flexible Capacity Needs Assessment for 2016

RfG Banding; Operability context. Title slide photo option (Arial 28pt bold) Ben Marshall SMARTer System Performance.

The Biggest Loser REDUCING HIGHER EDUCATION COSTS BY 50%

Annual Energy Consumption Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions. 9 Huntley Street. Conservation and Demand Management (CDM) Plan

LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION LITERATURE REVIEW STEEPLE

AUSTIN AREA SUMMARY REPORT ON BUSINESS February 2018

Electric Sector Restructuring and Utility GHG Emissions: Trends and Opportunities in the US

Distribution. POD Retrieval. Purpose: Example:

Final Flexible Capacity Needs Assessment for 2019

CCA Pilot Project Update

Managing Transition to Retail Competition. Lim Howe Run Managing Director, GCEO s Office Head, Strategic Investments

Page 1. Pty Ltd. provides. Key points. The SRES. 30 June 2012; The price of just over $ which is. The STP. year the.

Non-consolidated Forecast of Income <1>

ENERGY SLIDESHOW. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas

CANBRIAM ENERGY INC. CANBRIAM ENERGY FIELD DEVELOPMENT MODELLING USE CASE: STARTED FROM EXCEL NOW WE RE HERE 24 OCTOBER 2017 HOLLIE CORBIERE

Renewable Energy in The Netherlands

ENERGY SLIDESHOW. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas

CHAPTER Activity Cost Behavior

Transcription:

Appendix H-1- Class Specific Regression Model Statistics EB-01-000 Page 1 of 1 Delivered: February, 01 1 1 1 1 1 1 A widely used measure of goodness of fit is the Adjusted R-Squared. The Adjusted R-Squared measures how well the estimated model explains actual variation of the monthly sales data. The Adjusted R-Squared can vary from 0 (explains none of data variation) to 1.0 (explains all of the data variation). A model that can explain a high level of the historical sales variation is likely to generate a more accurate sales forecast. The mean absolute percent error (MAPE) measures the average absolute model error (variance between actual sales and predicted sales) on a percent basis. The Durbin-Watson statistic is a test about the presence of first order serial correlation. Serial correlation exists in a regression model when the error in the current period is partly a function of the error in the prior period. A Durbin-Watson statistic around the value of.0 suggests that there is no first order serial correlation. The statistical significance of an explanatory variable in the model is denoted by its T-Statistic value. T-statistic values above.0 (absolute) indicate statistical significance. A P-Value indicates the probability, in percentage, of the coefficient of a given explanatory variable having no impact on sales variation. The closer the P-value to zero, the higher the probability that the variable contributes to explaining historical sales variation and trends. 1

Residential Table 1: Residential Sales Forecast Model Statistics EB-01-000 Page of 1 Delivered: February, 01 Model Statistics Adjusted Observations Deg. of Freedom for Error R-Squared 0. Adjusted R-Squared 0.1 Model Sum of Squares 1,,,1 Sum of Squared Errors 1,1,,1 Mean Squared Error 1,, Std. Error of Regression 1, Mean Abs. Dev. (MAD),00 Mean Abs. % Err. (MAPE).% Durbin-Watson Statistic.0 1 1 1 Variable Coefficient StdErr T-Stat P-Value HDD 1.1. 1. 0.00% CDD1 1,0..0. 0.00% Pop*PCI*EI_Idx 1,.,0.0.0 0.00% Jan-0,1. 1,.. 0.00% Feb-0 -,01.0 1,. -. 1.% Nov- -,.0 1,. - 1..% Jun-1 -,0.0 1,.1 -. 0.0% Nov - 1,0.0,.1 -. 0.% Dec 0,.,.1. 0.0% The Residential model has an Adjusted R-Squared of 0.1 and a MAPE of.%, indicating that the model explains actual sales variation well. The Durbin-Watson Statistic of.0 indicates that serial correlation is not a concern. The primary model variables have T-Statistic values well above.0, indicating that the model drivers are highly statistically significant. The associated P-Values have either a 0 or a low probability indicating that all the variables contribute to explaining historical sales variation and trends. The Residential sales forecast model has tracked historic experience quite well. This can be seen in Figure 1 which shows actual and predicted monthly sales. The Residential sales model is robust and an appropriate tool for forecasting future sales. Figure 1: Residential Sales Actual vs. Predicted Sales kwh

EB-01-000 Page of 1 Delivered: February, 01 1 Forecasted Residential sales derived from the regression model are adjusted downward for expected incremental savings from future residential CDM activity. The assumption is that the impact of all past CDM activity (prior to 01) is embedded in the actual sales data and captured in the regression models. Table shows the annual historical Residential sales with CDM embedded and forecasted Residential sales with and without the CDM adjustment. Table : Historical Weather Normalized Actual and Forecast Sales - Residential (GWh) Weather Normalized before CDM % Change CDM adjustment Weather Normalized after CDM Year % Change 00, -, 00,1 -.% -,1 -.% 0, -1.% -, -1.% 0, 1.1% -, 1.1% 01,.% -,.% 01, 0.% -, 0.% 01, -1.% -, -1.% Average 00-01 0.0% 0.00% 01 Bridge Year, -0.1%,0-0.% 01 Test Year, 0.% 1,1 0.0% 01 Test Year,1 0.%, -0.% 01 Test Year, 0.% 0, -0.% 01 Test Year, 1.1%, -0.% 00 Test Year, 0.% 1,1-0.% Average 01-00 0.% -0.%

General Service < 0 kw Table : General Service < 0 kw Sales Forecast Model Statistics EB-01-000 Page of 1 Delivered: February, 01 Model Statistics Adjusted Observations Deg. of Freedom for Error R-Squared 0. Adjusted R-Squared 0. Model Sum of Squares,,0, Sum of Squared Errors,, Mean Squared Error,01,0 Std. Error of Regression, Mean Abs. Dev. (MAD),0 Mean Abs. % Err. (MAPE).% Durbin-Watson Statistic.0 Variable Coefficient StdErr T-Stat P-Value HDD 0..0 1. 0.00% CDD1 1.. 1. 0.00% GDP_Idx 1,0.,.. 0.1% CalDays 1,0...1 0.00% Jan-0,.,0.1.1 0.00% Feb-0 -,0.0,00. -.1 0.% Oct -,. 1,. -.0 0.% Dec,. 1,0.0. 0.00% The General Service < 0 kw model has an Adjusted R-Squared of 0. and a MAPE of.%, indicating that the model explains actual sales variation well. The Durbin-Watson Statistic of. indicates that serial correlation is not a concern. The model T-Statistic values above.0 indicate that all the model variables are statistically significant at the % and higher level of confidence. This is also shown in P-Values that fall between 0% and 1.0%. The General Service < 0 kw sales forecast model has tracked historic experience quite well. This can be seen in Figure which shows actual and predicted monthly sales. The General Service < 0 kw sales model is robust and an appropriate tool for forecasting future sales. 1 1

Figure : General Service < 0 kw Sales Actual vs. Predicted Sales kwh EB-01-000 Page of 1 Delivered: February, 01 Forecasted General Service < 0 kw sales derived from the regression model is then downward adjusted for expected incremental savings from future General Service < 0 kw CDM activity. The assumption is that the impact of all past CDM activity (prior to 01) is embedded in the actual sales data and captured in the regression models. Table shows the annual historical General Service < 0 kw sales with CDM embedded and forecasted General Service < 0 kw sales with and without the CDM adjustment. Table : Historical Weather Normalized Actual and Forecast Sales - General Service < 0 kw (GWh) 1 Weather Normalized before CDM % Change CDM adjustment Weather Normalized after CDM Year % Change 00 1,0-1,0 00 1,00 -.0% - 1,00 -.0% 0 1,01 0.% - 1,01 0.% 0 1,0 0.% - 1,0 0.% 01 1,00 0.% - 1,00 0.% 01 1,0 0.% - 1,0 0.% 01 1,0 0.% - 1,0 0.% Average 00-01 0.% 0.% 01 Bridge Year 1,0 0.% 1,01 0.% 01 Test Year 1,0 0.% 1 1,00-0.1% 01 Test Year 1,01 0.% 1,0-0.% 01 Test Year 1,0 0.% 1,0-0.% 01 Test Year 1,0 0.% 1,0-0.% 00 Test Year 1,0 1.0% 1,01-0.% Average 01-00 0.% -0.% General Service > 0 kw

Table : General Service > 0 kw Sales Forecast Model Statistics EB-01-000 Page of 1 Delivered: February, 01 Model Statistics Adjusted Observations Deg. of Freedom for Error R-Squared 0. Adjusted R-Squared 0. Model Sum of Squares,,0,1 Sum of Squared Errors,,,0 Mean Squared Error 1,1,1 Std. Error of Regression, Mean Abs. Dev. (MAD), Mean Abs. % Err. (MAPE).0% Durbin-Watson Statistic 1. 1 Variable Coefficient StdErr T-Stat P-Value HDD.0..1 0.00% CDD1 0... 0.00% ManGDP_Idx 1,0.,0.0. 0.00% CalDays,... 0.00% Jan-0-1,0.0,.0 -. 0.00% Feb-0,.1,.. 0.00% Sep- -,1.,. -.0 0.0% May-,.,1..1 0.0% Jun- - 0,. 1,0.1 -. 0.01% Dec-1 1,01.00,.0. 0.0% Nov-1 1,0.,1.. 0.% Jun 1,.1,..1 0.% The General Service > 0 kw model has an Adjusted R-Squared of 0. and a MAPE of.0% indicating that the model explains actual sales variation well. The Durbin-Watson Statistic of 1. indicates that serial correlation is not a concern. The explanatory variables have T-Statistic values above.0, indicating that all the model variables are statistically significant at the % and higher level of confidence. This is also supported by P-Values that fall between 0% and 1.0%. Forecasted sales are consistent with historical sales trend. This can be seen in Figure which depicts actual and predicted General Service > 0 kw sales. The General Service > 0 kw sales model is robust and an appropriate tool for forecasting future sales. Figure : General Service > 0 kw Sales Actual vs. Predicted Sales kwh

EB-01-000 Page of 1 Delivered: February, 01 1 Forecasted General Service > 0 kw sales derived from the regression model is then adjusted downward for expected incremental savings from future General Service > 0 kw CDM activity. The assumption is that the impact of all past CDM activity (prior to 01) is embedded in the actual sales data and captured in the regression models. Table shows the annual historical General Service > 0 kw sales with CDM embedded and forecasted General Service > 0 kw sales with and without the CDM adjustment. Table shows the annual historical General Service > 0 kw demand and forecasted General Service > 0 kw demand. 1 1 1 Table : Historical Weather Normalized Actual and Forecast Sales - General Service > 0 kw (GWh)

Weather Normalized before CDM % Change CDM adjustment EB-01-000 Page of 1 Weather Normalized Delivered: February, 01 after CDM % Change Year 00, -, 00,0 -.% -,0 -.% 0,1 1.0% -,1 1.0% 0, 1.% -, 1.% 01,0 1.1% -,0 1.1% 01, -0.% -, -0.% 01,1 0.1% -,1 0.1% Average 00-01 -0.% -0.% 01 Bridge Year,0 0.% 1,1 0.0% 01 Test Year, 1.%, 0.% 01 Test Year, 0.%, 0.0% 01 Test Year,1 0.% 1, -0.1% 01 Test Year,0 0.% 0, -0.% 00 Test Year,0 1.0% 0, -0.1% Average 01-00 0.% 0.0% Table : Historical Weather Normalized Actual and Forecast Demand - General Service > 0 kw (MW) Weather Normalized before CDM % Change CDM adjustment Weather Normalized after CDM Year % Change 00 1,1-1,1 00, -.% -, -.% 0,0 0.% -,0 0.% 0 1,0 1.% - 1,0 1.% 01 1, 0.% - 1, 0.% 01 1,0 0.% - 1,0 0.% 01 1,0-1.0% - 1,0-1.0% Average 00-01 -0.% -0.% 01 Bridge Year 1,0 1.0% 0 1, 0.% 01 Test Year 1, 1.% 1 1,1 0.% 01 Test Year 1, 0.% 1,1 0.0% 01 Test Year 1, 0.% 1,00-0.1% 01 Test Year 1,0 0.% 1,1-0.% 00 Test Year 1, 1.0% 1,1-0.1% Average 01-00 1.0% 0.1%

Sentinel Lighting Sales EB-01-000 Page of 1 Delivered: February, 01 Table : Sentinel Lighting Sales Forecast Model Statistics Model Statistics Iterations 1 Adjusted Observations Deg. of Freedom for Error R-Squared 0. Adjusted R-Squared 0. Model Sum of Squares 1,1. Sum of Squared Errors 1. Mean Squared Error.1 Std. Error of Regression 1.1 Mean Abs. Dev. (MAD) 1.1 Mean Abs. % Err. (MAPE).0% Durbin-Watson Statistic 1. Variable Coefficient StdErr T-Stat P-Value SentinelCusts 0. 0.00. 0.00% Apr-1-1. 1. -.0 0.00% Oct-1 -. 1. -.0 0.01% Jan. 0..1 0.00% Mar. 0.. 0.00% May. 0.. 0.00% Jul. 0.. 0.% Aug 1. 0.. 1.0% Oct. 0.. 0.00% Nov. 0.. 0.% Dec 1.1 0.. 0.% The primary explanatory variable for the Sentinel Lighting sales model is the Sentinel customer counts within PowerStream s territory. The Sentinel Lighting model has an Adjusted R-Squared of 0. and a MAPE of.0%, indicating that the model explains actual sales variation well. The Durbin-Watson Statistic of 1. indicates that serial correlation is not a concern. The explanatory variables have T-Statistic values above.0, indicating that the model variables are statistically significant at the % and higher level of confidence. This is also supported by P-Values that fall between 0% and 1.%.

Table shows the annual historical and forecasted Sentinel Lighting sales. Table shows the annual historical and forecasted Sentinel Lighting demand. Table : Historical Actual and Forecast Sales - Sentinel Lighting (MWh) EB-01-000 Page of 1 Delivered: February, 01 Year % Change 00 00 -.1% 0 -.1% 0 -.0% 01 1 -.% 01-0.% 01 -.% 01 Bridge Year.% 01 Test Year -0.% 01 Test Year -0.1% 01 Test Year 0.0% 01 Test Year 0.0% 00 Test Year 0.0% Table : Historical Actual and Forecast Demand - Sentinel Lighting (kw) Year % Change 00 1, 00 1,1 -.1% 0 1,.% 0 1, -.1% 01 1,01 -.% 01 1,0-0.% 01 -.% 01 Bridge Year.% 01 Test Year -0.% 01 Test Year -0.1% 01 Test Year 0.0% 01 Test Year 0.0% 00 Test Year 0.0% Street Lighting

Table : Street Lighting Sales Forecast Model Statistics EB-01-000 Page of 1 Delivered: February, 01 Model Statistics Iterations 1 Adjusted Observations Deg. of Freedom for Error R-Squared 0. Adjusted R-Squared 0.0 Model Sum of Squares 1,,. Sum of Squared Errors 0,,.1 Mean Squared Error,. Std. Error of Regression. Mean Abs. Dev. (MAD). Mean Abs. % Err. (MAPE).% Durbin-Watson Statistic. 1 Variable Coefficient StdErr T-Stat P-Value CONST 0..0 1. 0.00% HrLight -1. 1. -. 0.00% Nov-0-0.01. -. 0.0% Apr-0-0.1 1. -. 0.1% Feb- -..1 -. 0.0% Nov-1 -..0 -. 0.00% Dec-1. 1..0 0.00% Jan. 0.1.0.% Apr 1. 0.0. 0.00% May.0.. 0.0% Aug 0.1 1.1. 0.% Dec 1..0.1 0.% The primary independent variable for the Street Lighting sales model is Hours of Light. The Street Lighting model has an Adjusted R-Squared of 0.0, indicating that the model explains actual sales variation well. The Durbin-Watson Statistic of. indicates that serial correlation is not a concern. The explanatory variables have T-Statistic values above.0, indicating statistical significance. This is also supported by P-Values that fall between 0% and.%. In developing the load forecast for Street Lighting sales, PowerStream has taken into account the LED streetlight conversion planned by the municipalities in its service areas. Over a -year period of time, starting in 01, the existing HPS streetlights owned by the City of Vaughan, Markham and Barrie will be fully converted to the LED streetlights.

Delivered: February, 01 Inevitably, the efficiency and economics of LED lighting system will lead to reduction in energy consumption. Research and case studies suggested that the LED lighting technology reduced energy use by anywhere between 1% - 0%, depending on the quality of the LEDs deployed. A recent case study on Mississauga LED streetlights conversion revealed that the energy use was reduced by %. Table 1 references LED Streetlights case studies and energy use reduction in Canada and the United States. Table 1: LED Streetlights Studies EB-01-000 Page 1 of 1 Reference http://www.lightsavers.ca/case_studies/mis sissauga%0case%0study%0cinal.pdf http://www.lightsavers.ca/case_studies/wel land%0case%0study.pdf http://www.lightsavers.ca/case_studies/nor th%0bay%0case%0study.pdf http://www.lightsavers.ca/case_studies/ed monton%0case%0study.pdf Comment In Mississauga case study (largest in Canada), energy use reduced % In Welland case study, energy use reduced % In North Bay case study, energy use reduced % In Edmonton case study, energy use reduced 0% 1 1 1 1 1 http://www.stcatharinesstandard.ca/01/0 //led-streetlights-already-paying-off http://www.grahlighting.eu/learningcentre/street-lighting-technologycomparison http://www.innovativelight.com/hid-vs-ledlighting/ http://www.ledsmagazine.com/articles/01 /0/doe-gateway-report-compares-ledstreetlights-with-hps.html Welland's LED streetlights using,000 kwh/month compared with 0,000 kwh/month for HPS LED street lights use 0-0% less electricity and have at least times the life expectancy than HPS fixtures Based on system efficiency (which is more relevant than source efficiency) HID is around 0 lumens/w, LED at least 0 ln/w In Kansas City, MO, LED streetlights reduced energy use by 1-1% compared with HPS. Although the LEDs emitted 1% less light, it was higher quality and better directed (less light spill) For the purpose of forecasting Street Lighting sales, PowerStream assumed that 1) 1/ of the streetlights in scope will be converted to the LED streetlights each year over the -year window commencing in 01; and that ) the converted LED streetlights will reduce the energy use by 0%. PowerStream manually adjusted the Street Lighting load from the regression model by these reduced energy use. Table 1 shows the annual historical and forecasted Street Lighting sales. Table 1 shows the annual historical and forecasted Street Lighting demand. Table 1: Historical Actual and Forecast Sales - Street Lighting (MWh)

Year before LED Adjustment LED Adjustment after LED Adjustment % Change 00, -, 00, -, 1.% 0, -,.% 0,1 -,1 1.% 01 0, - 0,.% 01 1,0-1,0 0.% 01 0,1-0,1-1.% 01 Bridge Year 0, - 0, -0.1% 01 Test Year, -,,00 -.% 01 Test Year 0, - 1,1,1-1.% 01 Test Year 0, - 1,0,0-1.% 01 Test Year 0, - 1,, -1.0% 00 Test Year, -,, -1.% Table 1: Historical Actual and Forecast Demand - Street Lighting (MW) EB-01-000 Page 1 of 1 Delivered: February, 01 Year before LED Adjustment LED Adjustment after LED Adjustment % Change 00 1-1 00 1-1 -1.% 0 1-1.% 0 1-1 1.% 01 1-1 0.0% 01 1-1.% 01 1-1 0.0% 01 Bridge Year 1-1 -.% 01 Test Year 1-1 1 -.% 01 Test Year 1-0 1-1.% 01 Test Year 1-0 -1.% 01 Test Year 1-1 -1.0% 00 Test Year 1 - -1.% Large Use There are two customers in the Large Use class LU1 and LU. LU was classified as Large Use in 01. The load forecast was developed individually for each customer based on historical averages and then consolidated to derive the total load for the Large Use class. The three year average is used for each Large Use customer. Table 1 provides the annual historical and forecasted Large Use sales. Table 1: Historical Actual and Forecast Sales Large Use (MWh)

EB-01-000 Page 1 of 1 Delivered: February, 01 Year LU 1 % Change LU % Change Total % Change 00 0,01,,0 00, -.%,1.%,1 -.% 0, 1.% 1,.%,1.% 0, -1.%,.%,0 0.% 01,0-1.%,0 1.% 0,0 0.% 01,0-0.%,1-1.0%,1-0.% 01, -1.% 1,1 -.%, -.0% 01 Bridge Year, -1.% 1, -0.%, -0.% 01 Test Year,1-1.% 1,0-0.%, -0.% 01 Test Year,1-1.% 1,0-0.%, -0.% 01 Test Year,1-1.% 0, -0.%, -0.% 01 Test Year,0-1.% 0, -0.%, -0.% 00 Test Year,00-1.% 0,1-0.%, -0.%

Unmetered Scattered Load EB-01-000 Page 1 of 1 Delivered: February, 01 Similar to the Large Use, the load forecast for Unmetered Scattered Load (USL) was developed based on historical averages. The three year average is used to forecast USL class sales. Table 1 provides the annual historical and forecasted USL sales. Table 1: Historical Actual and Forecast Sales Unmetered Scattered Load (MWh) Year % Change 00,00 00 1, 1.% 0 1,00 0.% 0 1, 0.% 01 1,.% 01 1,1 1.% 01 1,.% 01 Bridge Year 1,0.% 01 Test Year 1,.% 01 Test Year 1,.% 01 Test Year 1,.% 01 Test Year 1,1.% 00 Test Year 1,0.%