August 5, 2020 Executive Secretary Michigan Public Service

Ann Arbor | Birmingham | Detroit | Grand Haven | Grand Rapids | Kalamazoo | Lansing | Novi

201 North Washington Square | Suite 910 Lansing, Michigan 48933

Telephone 517 / 482-6237 | Fax 517 / 482-6937 | www.varnumlaw.com

Laura Chappelle [email protected]

August 5, 2020

Ms. Lisa Felice Executive Secretary Michigan Public Service Commission 7109 W. Saginaw Highway P.O. Box 30221 Lansing, MI 48909

Re: MPSC Case No. U-20697

Dear Ms. Felice:

Attached for electronic filing in the above-referenced matter, please find the Official

Exhibits EIB-1 through EIB-16 on behalf of Michigan Energy Innovation Business Council and

Institute for Energy Innovation. Thank you for your assistance in this matter.

Very truly yours,

Laura A. Chappelle

LAC/sej Enclosures c. All parties of record.

1

LAURA S. SHERMAN, Ph.D. cell: 607.592.3026

[email protected] PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE: Oct. 2017-present Michigan Energy Innovation Business Council VP for Policy Development

Develop regulatory and legislative policy positions to support advanced energy businesses Engage with the Michigan Public Service Commission and Michigan legislature on behalf of

member companies. Support policy initiatives focused on wind energy, solar energy, electric vehicles, and corporate

purchasing of renewable energy. Assist with event planning including for annual conferences, networking events, tours, and

legislative networking opportunities.

Feb. 2017-present 5 Lakes Energy, Lansing, MI Senior Consultant Research, analysis, communication, and advocacy surrounding complex energy issues. Focus areas include renewable energy development, community engagement, stakeholder

coordination, and business sustainability. Support newsletter, website, and social media communications.

April 2015-Dec. 2016 U.S. Senate, Washington, DC Legislative Assistant/Policy Advisor

Policy advisor to Senator Michael Bennet (D-CO) on agriculture, energy, environment, land, and natural resource issues.

Legislative topics include: farming and ranching, public land conservation and management, water policy, energy development, renewable energy including energy tax incentives and transmission permitting, energy efficiency, endangered species, climate change, sportsmen’s issues, environmental pollution and regulations, air quality, and biofuels.

Drafting legislation; building coalitions; negotiating policy solutions; writing speeches; staffing the Senator at hearings of the Agriculture and Finance Committees.

2014-2015 U.S. Senate, Washington, DC AAAS Congressional Science Fellow

Competitively selected AAAS Fellow sponsored by the American Geophysical Union. Served in the Office of Senator Michael Bennet (D-CO).

Drafting legislation; helping to facilitate political coalitions; meeting with constituents; interacting with federal agencies; delivering policy briefings and recommendations.

2012-2014 University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI Postdoctoral Research Fellow

Successfully obtained competitive grant funding for novel method to track air pollution from power plants and metal smelters into rainfall across the Great Lakes region.

In collaboration with epidemiologists, developed and utilized new methods to assess the sources and pathways of human exposure to mercury pollution.

Published five manuscripts; presented talks and organized scientific sessions at national and international conferences.

MPSC Case No. U-20697Exhibit EIB-1 (LSS-1)

Page 1 of 2

2

2007-2012 University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI Graduate Researcher

Competed for and received National Defense Science and Engineering Graduate Fellowship and Graham Environmental Sustainability Institute Doctoral Fellowship.

Developed groundbreaking methods to “fingerprint” mercury pollution from coal-fired power plants and trace it into rainfall, lake sediments, and fish.

Published eight manuscripts, was interviewed for “The Environment Report” on NPR and general-circulation science magazines, presented research at national and international conferences.

Ph.D. dissertation received university-wide ProQuest Distinguished Dissertation Award and departmental John Dorr Graduate Academic Achievement Award.

2005-2007 Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Boston, MA Research Scientist

Found evidence for early lift on Earth in ancient rocks. Published two manuscripts. SERVICE & LEADERSHIP: 2017-present Communications Chair for Advancing Women in Energy 2013-2104 Supported the Ann Arbor Energy Commission in developing and researching options for community solar projects 2009-2014 Peer reviewer of more than 20 scientific manuscripts 2009 Initiator and organizer of new departmental seminar series, University of Michigan 2008-2010 President of department student organization (GeoClub), University of Michigan 2008 Lead organizer of Michigan Geophysical Union Poster Conference 2007-2008 Department Steward to Graduate Employees Union, University of Michigan

EDUCATION: Ph.D. 2012 Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Michigan (GPA: 8.837 out of 9.0) B.S. 2005 Geological and Environmental Science, Stanford University (GPA: 4.007 out of 4.33)


Page 2 of 2

U20697‐MEIBC‐CE‐202 Page 1 of 1

Question:

5. For each of Category 1, 2, and 3 distributed generation, when does Consumers Energy forecast

that applications will reach the program cap?

Response:

Due to the uncertain impacts of the ongoing COVID‐19 pandemic, it is not entirely clear when the

program cap will be reached for Category 1, 2, and 3 distributed generation. Based solely on the

historical participation rates in the Company’s program, the program cap for Category 1 generation

could be reached in October of 2020 and the program cap for Category 2 generation could be reached

by the end of 2021. Historical participation levels may not be an accurate indication of future

participation in the program due to the uncertainty caused by COVID‐19. Since there has been a lack of

anaerobic digestion interest in the program historically, there is no clear indication of when the program

cap for Category 3 will be reached.

___________________________ KEITH G. TROYER

April 14, 2020

EGI Contracts & Settlements


Page 1 of 1

STATE Type of

program Aggregate Cap Definition (Detailed)

Michigan DG program 0.75% of previous year's peak load (0.5% up to 20 kW; 0.25% from 20 kW - 150 kW)

STATE Type of

programAggregate Cap Definition (Detailed)

Nebraska NEM 1% of average monthly peak demand

Indiana NEM 1% of most-recent summer peak load

Kansas NEM 1% of previous year's peak demandVirginia NEM 1% of utility's adjusted peak load forecast for previous year

Kentucky NEM 1% single-hour peak load during previous year

Alaska NEM 1.5% of average retail demand

West Virginia NEM 3% of previous year peak demand, with 0.5% reserved for residential

Washington NEM 4% of utility's 1996 peak demandDelaware NEM 5% of a utility's aggregated customer monthly demand during year

Missouri NEM 5% of single-hour peak demand during previous year; 1% annual increase

Illinois NEM 5% of total peak demand supplied in previous year

Utah NEM 170 MW DC for residential; 70 MW DC for other customers (NEM 2.0)

Maryland NEM 1,500 MW (statewide), ~10% peak demand

STATE Type of

program Aggregate Cap Definition (Detailed)

Arizona NEM No Cap

Arkansas NEM No Cap

California NEM No Cap (NEM 2.0); 5% of sum of non-coincident demands (NEM 1.0)Colorado NEM No Cap

Connecticut NEM No Cap

District of Columbia

NEMNo Cap

Florida NEM No Cap Idaho NEM No Cap for ID Power Company and PacifiCorp; 0.1% of 1996 peak demand for Avista

Iowa NEM No Cap

Louisiana NEM No Cap (NEM 2.0)

Maine NEM No Cap; PUC review trigger set at 3% of utility peak demand

Massachusetts NEM No Cap (10/25 kW or less); 15% of highest historic peak load for othersMinnesota NEM No Cap (PUC may elect to limit if NEM reaches 4% of total retail sales)


Page 1 of 2

Table created by EQ Research. https://eq-research.com/

Montana NEM No Cap

Nevada NEM No Cap (25 kW or less under NEM 2.0)

New Hampshire

NEMNo Cap (NEM 2.0); 100 MW statewide, roughly 4% (NEM 1.0)

New Jersey NEM No Cap (BPU authorized to cap at 5.8% of annual in-state retail sales).

New Mexico NEM No Cap

New York NEM No Cap; PSC to review by 2020 or at utility specific MW triggers

North Carolina NEM No Cap North Dakota NEM No Cap

Ohio NEM No Cap

Oklahoma NEM No Cap

Oregon NEM No cap, but PUC may cap at 0.5% or more

Pennsylvania NEM No Cap Rhode Island NEM No cap for National Grid; 3% for Pascoag & Block Island Utility Districts

South Carolina NEM No Cap

Vermont NEM No Cap

Wisconsin NEM No Cap

Wyoming NEM No Cap


Page 2 of 2

https://eq-research.com/

U20697‐MEIBC‐CE‐198 Page 1 of 2 Question: 1. For Category 1 (residential distributed generation systems < 20kW) of the current distributed

generation program, please determine the following values. Please include all calculations to determine these values.

a. Total kW available for Category 1 under the program (given soft cap of 0.5% of average in‐

state peak load). b. Current amount of installed/operational kW in Category 1. c. Remaining amount of kW available for installation under Category 1 program based on total

installed/operational kW (given total kW available as determined in a. and current amount of kW installed/operational in b.).

d. Remaining percentage available in the Category 1 program currently based on installed/operational distributed generation systems.

e. Current amount of kW of pending applications for Category 1. f. Total current amount of installed/operational kW in Category 1 plus current amount of kW

of pending applications for Category 1. g. Remaining amount of kW that would be available for installation under Category 1 program

given all installed/operational systems and assuming all pending applications were completed and operational.

h. Remaining percentage available in the Category 1 program given all installed/operational systems and assuming all pending applications were completed and operational.

i. For each of the months April 2019 through March 2020, the number of applications under Category 1 program and the number of kW requested in such applications.

Response:

a. The applicable Category 1 cap of the program can be calculated as 0.5% of the

Consumers Energy average peak load for the preceding 5‐year period. This

calculation results in a current program cap of 36,405 kW.

b. The total installed capacity of active Category 1 program participants is 25,433

kW.

c. The remaining program capacity available for Category 1 systems can be

calculated as the difference between the cap in part a. to this response (36,405

kW) and the amount of Category 1 installed capacity active in the program

(25,433 kW). This calculation results in remaining Category 1 program capacity

of 10,972 kW.

d. The remaining Category 1 program capacity can be calculated as the Category 1

program capacity available (10,972 kW) divided by the total Category 1 program

cap (36,405 kW). This calculation results in remaining Category 1 program

capacity of approximately 30.14%.

e. The Company has 2,510 kW of total capacity of pending or incomplete Category

1 applications for the Net Metering Program.


Page 1 of 2


f. The total installed Category 1 program capacity (25,433 kW) plus the pending or

incomplete Category 1 applications (2,510 kW) is 27,943 kW.

g. The total Category 1 program cap (36,405 kW) minus the sum of (i) the total

installed Category 1 program capacity and (ii) the pending or incomplete

Category 1 applications (27,943 kW) is 8,462 kW.

h. The remaining Category 1 program capacity calculated in part g. (8,462 kW)

divided by the total Category 1 program cap (36,405 kW) is approximately

23.24%.

i. Please see the table below:

Month Applications Reviewed Total kW

2019‐04 102 879

2019‐05 156 1190

2019‐06 168 1221

2019‐07 138 1105

2019‐08 154 1076

2019‐09 145 1070

2019‐10 170 1310

2019‐11 121 969

2019‐12 100 803

2020‐01 134 1150

2020‐02 108 729

2020‐03 82 565

2020‐04* 27 186

*Through April 14, 2020

___________________________ KEITH G. TROYER

April 14, 2020

EGI Contracts and Settlements


Page 2 of 2


Question:

2. For Category 2 (distributed generation systems 20kW‐150kW) of the current distributed

generation program, please determine the following values. Please include all

calculations to determine these values.

a. Total kW available for Category 2 under the program (given soft cap of 0.25% of

average in‐state peak load).

b. Current amount of installed/operational kW in Category 2.

c. Remaining amount of kW available for installation under Category 2 program

based on total installed/operational kW (given total kW available as determined in

a. and current amount of kW installed/operational in b.).

d. Remaining percentage available in the Category 2 program currently based on

installed/operational distributed generation systems.

e. Current amount of kW of pending applications for Category 2.

f. Total current amount of installed/operational kW in Category 2 plus current

amount of kW of pending applications for Category 2.

g. Remaining amount of kW that would be available for installation under Category

2 program given all installed/operational systems and assuming all pending

applications were completed and operational.

h. Remaining percentage available in the Category 2 program given all

installed/operational systems and assuming all pending applications were

completed and operational.

i. For each of the months April 2019 through March 2020, the number of

applications under Category 2 program and the number of kW requested in such

applications.

Response:

a. The applicable Category 2 cap of the program can be calculated as 0.25% of the

Consumers Energy average peak load for the preceding 5‐year period. This

calculation results in a current program cap of 18,203 kW.

b. The total installed capacity of active Category 2 program participants is 11,152

kW.

c. The remaining program capacity available for Category 2 systems can be

calculated as the difference between the cap in part a. to this response (18,203

kW) and the amount of Category 2 installed capacity active in the program

(11,152 kW). This calculation results in remaining Category 2 program capacity

of 7,051 kW.

d. The remaining Category 2 program capacity can be calculated as the Category 2

program capacity available (7,051 kW) divided by the total Category 2 program

cap (18,203 kW). This calculation results in remaining Category 1 program

capacity of approximately 38.74%.


Page 1 of 2


e. The Company has 2,746 kW of total capacity of pending or incomplete Category

2 applications for the Net Metering Program.

f. The total installed Category 2 program capacity (11,152 kW) plus the pending or

incomplete Category 2 applications (2,746 kW) is 13,898 kW.

g. The total Category 2 program cap (18,203 kW) minus the sum of (i) the total

installed Category 2 program capacity and (ii) the pending or incomplete

Category 2 applications (13,898 kW) is 4,305 kW.

h. The remaining Category 2 program capacity calculated in part g. (4,305 kW)

divided by the total Category 2 program cap (18,203 kW) is approximately

23.65%.

i. Please see the table below:

Month Applications Reviewed Total kW

2019‐04 12 643

2019‐05 9 975

2019‐06 1 66

2019‐07 2 178

2019‐08 4 541

2019‐09 5 437

2019‐10 6 508

2019‐11 4 614

2019‐12 9 1280

2020‐01 4 303

2020‐02 2 377

2020‐03 2 401

2020‐04* 0 0

* Through April 14, 2020

___________________________ KEITH G. TROYER

April 14, 2020



Page 2 of 2

ϮϬϭ�EŽƌƚŚ�tĂƐŚŝŶŐƚŽŶ�^ƋƵĂƌĞ�ͮ�^ƵŝƚĞ�ϵϭϬ�>ĂŶƐŝŶŐ͕�DŝĐŚŝŐĂŶ�ϰϴϵϯϯ�

�dĞůĞƉŚŽŶĞ�ϱϭϳ�ͬ�ϰϴϮͲϲϮϯϳ�ͮ�&Ăǆ�ϱϭϳ�ͬ�ϰϴϮͲϲϵϯϳ�ͮ�ǁǁǁ͘ǀĂƌŶƵŵůĂǁ͘ĐŽŵ�

0(0272�� 0LFKLJDQ�(QHUJ\�,QQRYDWLRQ�%XVLQHVV�&RXQFLO�

)520�� /DXUD�&KDSSHOOH��7LP�/XQGJUHQ��9DUQXP�//3�

5(�� 'LVWULEXWHG�*HQHUDWLRQ�DQG�(OHFWULF�,QWHUFRQQHFWLRQ��

'$7(�� 0DUFK��

,� ([HFXWLYH�6XPPDU\�

$W�UHFHQW�6HQDWH�(QHUJ\�DQG�7HFKQRORJ\�&RPPLWWHH��³&RPPLWWHH´��KHDULQJV��TXHVWLRQV�KDYH� DULVHQ� UHJDUGLQJ� ZKHWKHU� WKHUH� LV� FOHDU� VWDWH� VWDWXWRU\� DXWKRULW\� UHTXLULQJ� HOHFWULF�LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ��³LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ´��RI� UHVLGHQWLDO�DQG�FRPPHUFLDO�VRODU�V\VWHPV��N:�� ,Q�SDUW�� WKH� &RPPLWWHH� UHFHLYHG� WHVWLPRQ\� RQ�0DUFK� �� IURP� 3HQLQVXOD� 6RODU�� VWDWLQJ� WKDW�ZKHQ� WKH� VRODU� 'LVWULEXWHG� *HQHUDWLRQ� �³'*´�� FDS�� ZDV� UHDFKHG� LQ� 8SSHU� 3HQLQVXOD� 3RZHU�&RPSDQ\¶V��³833&2´��VHUYLFH�WHUULWRU\��WKH�XWLOLW\�GHQLHG�DOO�LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ�DSSOLFDWLRQV�XQWLO�WKH� FDS�ZDV� LQFUHDVHG� LQ� D� VXEVHTXHQW�0LFKLJDQ� 3XEOLF�6HUYLFH�&RPPLVVLRQ� �³036&´� RU� WKH�³&RPPLVVLRQ´��HOHFWULF�UDWH�FDVH�VHWWOHPHQW��&DVH�1R��8��

<RX�KDYH�DVNHG�ZKHWKHU�VWDWH�ODZ�VSHFLILFDOO\�UHTXLUHV�DQ�LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ�ZLWKLQ�WKH�'*�VWDWXWRU\� UHTXLUHPHQWV� RU� RWKHUZLVH� RQFH� WKH� '*� FDS� LV� PHW�� 7R� DQVZHU� WKLV� TXHVWLRQ�� ZH�FRQGXFWHG�D� OHJDO�UHYLHZ�DQG�DQDO\VLV�RI�FXUUHQW�IHGHUDO�DQG�VWDWH�VWDWXWHV�DQG�UHJXODWLRQV��2XU�DQDO\VLV� IRXQG� WKDW� WKHUH� DUH�QR� VWDWH� VWDWXWHV� LQ�0LFKLJDQ�ZKLFK� VSHFLILFDOO\� UHTXLUH� LQYHVWRU�RZQHG�XWLOLWLHV�WR�LQWHUFRQQHFW�UHVLGHQWLDO�DQG�VPDOO�FRPPHUFLDO�VRODU�V\VWHPV��N:��WR�WKH�XWLOLW\�JULG�RQFH�WKH�GLVWULEXWHG�JHQHUDWLRQ�FDS�IRU�WKDW�XWLOLW\�LV�UHDFKHG��,QWHUFRQQHFWLRQ�RI�WKHVH�V\VWHPV�PD\� EH� UHTXLUHG� XQGHU� IHGHUDO� ODZ� �L�H�� 3853$�� EXW� WKLV� KDV� QRW� \HW� EHHQ� OHJDOO\�WHVWHG� LQ� 0LFKLJDQ�� DV� QR� 036&� FRPSODLQW� FDVH� KDV� EHHQ� EURXJKW� E\� D� FXVWRPHU� GHQLHG�LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ��H�J�� LQ�833&2¶V�WHUULWRU\�DIWHU� WKH�LQLWLDO�UHVLGHQWLDO�VRODU�FDS�ZDV�UHDFKHG�LQ��+LJKOLJKWV�RI�RXU�ILQGLQJV�LQFOXGH�WKH�IROORZLQJ��

7KHUH� KDV� EHHQ� QR� FRPSUHKHQVLYH� UHYLHZ� E\� WKH� /HJLVODWXUH� RI� WKH�LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ� VWDWXWRU\� UHTXLUHPHQWV�� GHVSLWH� LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ� KDYLQJ� EHHQ�DGGUHVVHG�LQ�VHYHUDO�VSHFLILF�UHJXODWRU\�FDWHJRULHV�RQ�RFFDVLRQ��,W�DSSHDUV�WKLV�KDV�UHVXOWHG�LQ�D�UHJXODWRU\�JDS�QRZ�EHLQJ�SRWHQWLDOO\�IDFHG�E\�FXVWRPHUV�ZKR�ZLVK�WR�LQWHUFRQQHFW�RQFH�WKH�XWLOLWLHV�KDYH�PHW�WKHLU�QHW�PHWHULQJ�'*�FDSV��

�6HOI�VHUYLFH�� FXVWRPHUV� ZLWK� RQ�VLWH� JHQHUDWRUV� DUH�� E\� GHILQLWLRQ�� QRW�LQWHUFRQQHFWHG�ZLWK� WKH� JULG�� VR� WKHLU� UHODWLRQVKLS� WR� WKH� XWLOLW\� LV� GLIIHUHQW� WKDQ�

��0&/��7KH�3XEOLF�8WLOLW\�5HJXODWRU\�3ROLFLHV�$FW�RI��8�6�&��D��0&/��Y��³3853$´��


Page 1 of 9

0(02��0LFKLJDQ�(,%&�'$7(��0DUFK��3$*(��RI��

��

WKDW� RI� D� QHW� PHWHULQJ�'*� FXVWRPHU� ZLWK� DQ� LQWHUFRQQHFWHG� JHQHUDWRU�� 8QGHU�0LFKLJDQ¶V�ODZ��D�FXVWRPHU�FDQ�DOZD\V�LQVWDOO�D�VRODU�V\VWHP�IRU�³VHOI�VHUYLFH´�LI�WKH�FXVWRPHU�LV�QRW�JULG�FRQQHFWHG��

7KH� PHUFKDQW� JHQHUDWLRQ� VWDWXWH� JXDUDQWHHLQJ� LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ� RQO\� DSSOLHV� WR�JHQHUDWRUV� ODUJHU� WKDQ��N:�LQ� VL]H��6PDOOHU�JHQHUDWRUV�ZRXOG�QHHG� WR�DFFHVV�WKH� LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ� VWDQGDUGV� XQGHU� DQRWKHU� UHJXODWRU\� FDWHJRU\� �H�J�� WKH� '*�SURJUDP��

8QGHU� FXUUHQW�036&� UXOHV�� D� XWLOLW\� PXVW� SURYLGH� QRWLFH� WR� WKH�036&� DQG� LWV�FXVWRPHUV�ZKHQ�WKH�FDS�LV�UHDFKHG�DQG�WKDW�LWV�'*�SURJUDP�LV�FORVHG�DQG�WKDW�QR�QHZ� DSSOLFDWLRQV�ZLOO� EH� DFFHSWHG��7KH� ODQJXDJH� RI� WKH� UXOH� LV�PDQGDWRU\� ��WKH�HOHFWULF�SURYLGHU�«� VKDOO� SURYLGH�QRWLFH«��$�XWLOLW\�PD\�YROXQWDULO\�REOLJDWH�LWVHOI�WR�GR�DGGLWLRQDO�LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQV��EXW�FXVWRPHUV�PD\�QRW�WKHQ�EH�DEOH�WR�UHO\�RQ� WKH� SURWHFWLRQV� RI� WKH� WLPHOLQHV� DQG� H[SHQVH� OLPLWDWLRQV� SURYLGHG� E\� WKH�H[LVWLQJ�UXOHV��

&XVWRPHUV�FDQ�OLNHO\�REWDLQ�DQG�XVH�3853$�4)�VWDWXV�ZLWK�WKH�)HGHUDO�(QHUJ\�5HJXODWRU\�&RPPLVVLRQ��³)(5&´��WR�JDLQ�DFFHVV�WR�WKH�036&V�LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ�UXOHV��EXW��WR�RXU�NQRZOHGJH��WKLV�KDV�QRW�\HW�EHHQ�XVHG�WR�SURYLGH�LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ�DFFHVV�LQ�0LFKLJDQ�IRU�VPDOO�VRODU�V\VWHPV��$GGLWLRQDOO\��WKLV�ZLOO�QRW�HQVXUH�WKDW�FXVWRPHUV�DUH�DEOH�WR�EH�IDLUO\�SDLG�IRU�SRZHU�VHQW�WR�WKH�JULG��LQ�WKH�VDPH�ZD\�WKH�'*�SURJUDP�GRHV��

:KLOH� VRPH� XWLOLWLHV� KDYH� DSSDUHQWO\� JLYHQ� YHUEDO� DVVXUDQFHV� WKDW� '*� V\VWHPV�ZLOO�FRQWLQXH�WR�EH�LQWHUFRQQHFWHG�RQFH�WKH�VWDWXWRU\�'*�FDS�LV�PHW��VXFK�DV�WKRVH�SURYLGHG� LQ� UHFHQW� WHVWLPRQ\� EHIRUH� WKH� 6HQDWH� (QHUJ\� DQG� 7HFKQRORJ\�&RPPLWWHH��ZH�KDYH�IRXQG�QRWKLQJ�LQ�VWDWH�ODZ�RU�&RPPLVVLRQ�RUGHUV�WKDW�ZRXOG�UHTXLUH�VXFK�LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQV��

,,� ,QWURGXFWLRQ�

5HFHQW� FRQFHUQV� DERXW� &RQVXPHUV� (QHUJ\� &RPSDQ\� ��&RQVXPHUV� (QHUJ\�� 833&2��'7(�(OHFWULF�&RPSDQ\��'7(�(OHFWULF��DQG�RWKHU�HOHFWULF�XWLOLWLHV�KLWWLQJ�WKHLU�VWDWXWRU\�FDSV�

IRU� UHVLGHQWLDO� DQG� FRPPHUFLDO� VRODU� LQ� WKHLU� QHW� PHWHULQJ�'*� SURJUDPV� KDYH� UDLVHG� WZR�SDUWLFXODU�TXHVWLRQV�� ZKHWKHU�FXVWRPHUV�ZLOO�EH�DEOH� WR�FRQWLQXH� WR� LQVWDOO� DQG� LQWHUFRQQHFW�WKHLU�KRPH�DQG�VPDOO�FRPPHUFLDO�VRODU�V\VWHPV�RQFH� WKH�FDS� LV� UHDFKHG��DQG� LI�VR��XQGHU�ZKDW�WHUPV�� DQG� �� ZKDW� UDWH� ZRXOG� EH� SDLG� IRU� H[FHVV� SRZHU� VHQW� WR� WKH� XWLOLW\� XQGHU� WKRVH�FLUFXPVWDQFHV��DVVXPLQJ�FXVWRPHUV�ZHUH�VWLOO�DOORZHG�WR�LQWHUFRQQHFW��

��9LGHR�DYDLODEOH�DW��KWWSV��PLVHQDWH�YLHELW�FRP�SOD\HU�SKS"KDVK $N7'0WP4K<�� 6HFWLRQ� �� RI� �� 3$� �� SURYLGHV�� LQ� SDUW�� WKDW�� $Q� HOHFWULF� XWLOLW\� RU� DOWHUQDWLYH� HOHFWULF�

VXSSOLHU�LV�QRW�UHTXLUHG�WR�DOORZ�IRU�D�GLVWULEXWHG�JHQHUDWLRQ�SURJUDP�WKDW�LV�JUHDWHU�WKDQ��RI�LWV�DYHUDJH�LQ�VWDWH�SHDN� ORDG� IRU� WKH� SUHFHGLQJ� �� FDOHQGDU� \HDUV�� 7KH� HOHFWULF� XWLOLW\� RU� DOWHUQDWLYH� HOHFWULF� VXSSOLHU� VKDOO� QRWLI\� WKH�FRPPLVVLRQ�LI�LWV�GLVWULEXWHG�JHQHUDWLRQ�SURJUDP�UHDFKHV�WKH��OLPLW�XQGHU�WKLV�VXEVHFWLRQ��


Page 2 of 9

0(02��0LFKLJDQ�(,%&�'$7(��0DUFK��3$*(��RI��

��

7KLV� PHPR� SURYLGHV� D� KLJK�OHYHO� UHYLHZ� RI� WKH� FXUUHQW� HOHFWULF� LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ�UHJXODWLRQV�DQG�KRZ�WKRVH�PLJKW�DSSO\�WR�QHW�PHWHULQJ�'*�FXVWRPHUV�DIWHU�WKH�FDS�LV�PHW��7KH�PHPR�DOVR�H[DPLQHV�SRVVLEOH�UDWH�LPSDFWV�IRU�FXVWRPHUV�LQWHUHVWHG�LQ�WKH�'*�SURJUDP�RQFH�WKH�VRODU�'*�FDSV�DUH�PHW��7KH�ILUVW�VHFWLRQ�EHORZ�DGGUHVVHV�WKH�UHJXODWLRQV��LQ�JHQHUDO��DSSO\LQJ�WR�LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ��DQG�WKH�VHFRQG�VHFWLRQ�DGGUHVVHV�ZKDW�UDWH�PLJKW�DSSO\�IRU�SRZHU�GHOLYHUHG�WR�WKH�XWLOLW\�RQFH�WKH�'*�FDS�KDV�EHHQ�PHW��

$� ,QWHUFRQQHFWLRQ�

:LWK�UHVSHFW� WR�LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ�� WKH�PDMRU�FRQFHUQV�FXVWRPHUV� WUDGLWLRQDOO\�IDFH�DUH�WKH�ZLOOLQJQHVV�RI� WKH�XWLOLW\� WR� LQWHUFRQQHFW�� WKH� WLPHOLQHVV�RI�XWLOLW\� UHVSRQVHV�GXULQJ� WKH�SURFHVV��DQG� WKH�FRVWV�RI� WKH� LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ��$OO�RI� WKHVH�FRQFHUQV�DUH�DGGUHVVHG�E\� WKH�&RPPLVVLRQ¶V�FXUUHQW� LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ� VWDQGDUGV�� 7KH� GHYHORSPHQW� RI� WKRVH� VWDQGDUGV� LV� GLVFXVVHG� EULHIO\�EHORZ��DV�LV�D�FXUVRU\�UHYLHZ�RI�KRZ�WKH\�DSSO\�WR�FXVWRPHUV�ZKR�KDYH�YDULRXV�W\SHV�RI�RQ�VLWH�JHQHUDWLRQ�±�LQ�WKH�FRQWH[W�RI�HDFK�UHJXODWRU\�FDWHJRU\��

$V�GLVFXVVHG�EHORZ�� LW� DSSHDUV� WKDW� RQFH� WKH�QHW�PHWHULQJ�'*�FDS� LV� UHDFKHG��RQO\� WKH�IHGHUDO�3853$�ODZ�RIIHUV�D�FHUWDLQ�SDWK�WR�LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ�ULJKWV�IRU�VPDOO�UHQHZDEOH�SURMHFWV��$OWKRXJK� WKH� 3853$� ODZ� DSSOLHV� WR� DOO� RI� WKH� VWDWHV�� LQ� �� WKH� 0LFKLJDQ� /HJLVODWXUH�DIILUPDWLYHO\�DGRSWHG�WKH�ODZV�SURWHFWLRQV�LQWR�VWDWH�ODZ��6HH�0&/��Y��

�� 6HOI�6HUYLFH�3RZHU�

$V� D� FODULI\LQJ� PDWWHU�� ZH� VKRXOG� GLVWLQJXLVK� WKLV� FDWHJRU\� IURP� WKH� VWDUW�� 8WLOLW\�FXVWRPHUV�KDYH�D�ULJKW�WR�VHOI�JHQHUDWH�WKDW�LV�SUREDEO\�LQKHUHQW�DQG�QHHGV�QR�VSHFLILF�OHJLVODWLYH�JUDQW�� EXW� LQ� DQ\� HYHQW� LV� UHLQIRUFHG� LQ� WZR� SODFHV� E\� VWDWXWH�� 0&/� ��D�� DQG� 0&/�� 7KH� ODWWHU� RI� WKHVH� RQO\� DSSOLHV� WR� LQGXVWULDO� FXVWRPHUV�� 7KH� IRUPHU� DSSOLHV� WR�UHVLGHQWLDO�DQG�VPDOO�FRPPHUFLDO�FXVWRPHUV�DV�ZHOO��DQG�VWDWHV�LQ�UHOHYDQW�SDUW��

7KLV� DFW� GRHV� QRW� SURKLELW� RU� OLPLW� WKH� ULJKW� RI� D� SHUVRQ� WR� REWDLQ� VHOI�VHUYLFH�SRZHU� DQG� GRHV� QRW� LPSRVH� D� WUDQVLWLRQ�� LPSOHPHQWDWLRQ�� H[LW� IHH�� RU� DQ\� RWKHU�VLPLODU�FKDUJH�RQ�VHOI�VHUYLFH�SRZHU��$�SHUVRQ�XVLQJ�VHOI�VHUYLFH�SRZHU�LV�QRW�DQ�HOHFWULF� VXSSOLHU�� HOHFWULF� XWLOLW\�� RU� D� SHUVRQ� FRQGXFWLQJ� DQ� HOHFWULF� XWLOLW\�EXVLQHVV�� $V� XVHG� LQ� WKLV� VXEVHFWLRQ�� VHOI�VHUYLFH� SRZHU�� PHDQV� DQ\� RI� WKH�IROORZLQJ�� D�� (OHFWULFLW\� JHQHUDWHG� DQG� FRQVXPHG� DW� DQ� LQGXVWULDO� VLWH� RU�FRQWLJXRXV�LQGXVWULDO�VLWH�RU�VLQJOH�FRPPHUFLDO�HVWDEOLVKPHQW�RU�VLQJOH�UHVLGHQFH�ZLWKRXW�WKH�XVH�RI�DQ�HOHFWULF�XWLOLW\V�WUDQVPLVVLRQ�DQG�GLVWULEXWLRQ�V\VWHP��>0&/��D��D�@�

7KXV��WKH�VWDWXWH�UHTXLUHV�WKDW�WKH�JHQHUDWRU�LV�QRW�LQWHUFRQQHFWHG�ZLWK�WKH�JULG��LW�GRHV�QRW�UHO\�RQ� XWLOLW\� WUDQVPLVVLRQ� RU� GLVWULEXWLRQ� OLQHV�� DQG� SXUHO\� VHUYHV� WKH� ORDG� EHKLQG� WKH� PHWHU��JHQHUDWHG�DQG�FRQVXPHG�DW�«�>D@�VLQJOH�FRPPHUFLDO�HVWDEOLVKPHQW�RU�VLQJOH�UHVLGHQFH��7KXV��E\�GHILQLWLRQ��LW�FDQQRW�EH�IHG�EDFN�WR�WKH�JULG��QRU�FDQ�LW�EH�GLVWULEXWHG�WR�DQRWKHU�VLWH��7KLV�LV��WKHUHIRUH��D�GLIIHUHQW�NLQG�RI�LQVWDOODWLRQ�DQG�UHODWLRQVKLS�ZLWK�WKH�JULG�IRU�WKH�KRPHRZQHU�WKDQ�D�'*�LQVWDOODWLRQ�ZRXOG�EH�DQG�UDLVHV�GLIIHUHQW�WHFKQLFDO�DQG�HFRQRPLF�FKDOOHQJHV�DQG�LVVXHV��,W�LV�QRW�D�VLPSOH�VXEVWLWXWH��


Page 3 of 9

0(02��0LFKLJDQ�(,%&�'$7(��0DUFK��3$*(��RI��

��

7KH��VHOI�VHUYLFH��SURYLVLRQ�ZDV�SDVVHG�DV�SDUW�RI� WKH�&XVWRPHU�&KRLFH�DQG�(OHFWULFLW\�5HOLDELOLW\�$FW��3$��RI��ZKHUH�LW�ZDV�LQWHQGHG�WR�FODULI\�WKDW�E\�DOORZLQJ�FXVWRPHUV�WR�VKRS� IRU� WKHLU� HOHFWULF� SRZHU� IURP� WKLUG�SDUW\� VXSSOLHUV� �$OWHUQDWLYH� (OHFWULF� 6XSSOLHUV�� WKH�/HJLVODWXUH�GLG�QRW�LQWHQG�WR�DOVR�UHVWULFW�WKRVH�FXVWRPHUV�DELOLW\�WR�VXSSO\�WKHLU�RZQ�SRZHU��LI�WKH\�VR�FKRRVH��

�� 0HUFKDQW�*HQHUDWLRQ�

$QRWKHU�VWDWXWRU\�SURYLVLRQ�DGGHG�E\�3$��RI��LQ�DQ�HIIRUW�WR�VSXU�FRPSHWLWLRQ�LQ�0LFKLJDQV� HOHFWULF� PDUNHW� ZDV�0&/� ��H�� ZKLFK� HQVXUHG� WKDW� PHUFKDQW� SODQWV� ZRXOG� EH�LQWHUFRQQHFWHG� E\� WKH� XWLOLWLHV� LQ� D� WLPHO\� PDQQHU�� $� �PHUFKDQW� SODQW�� LV� GHILQHG� LQ� 0&/��J�H��DV�DQ�LQ�VWDWH��QRQ�XWLOLW\�JHQHUDWRU�ZLWK�D�FDSDFLW\�RI�PRUH�WKDQ��N:��:KLOH�WKLV�SURYLVLRQ�DGGUHVVHV�SURMHFWV�WRR�ODUJH�WR�DSSO\�WR�WKH�FDWHJRULHV�RI�FRQFHUQ�KHUH��LW�LV�QHYHUWKHOHVV�RI�LQWHUHVW�EHFDXVH�LW�GURYH�WKH�FUHDWLRQ�RI�WKH�036&V�LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ�UXOHV��DV�GLVFXVVHG�EHORZ��

7KH�036&V�,QWHUFRQQHFWLRQ�DQG�1HW�0HWHULQJ�6WDQGDUGV��,QWHUFRQQHFWLRQ�6WDQGDUGV��5��D�±�5��ZHUH�ILUVW�SURPXOJDWHG�LQ�UHVSRQVH�WR�WKH�UHTXLUHPHQW�LQ�0&/��H�WKDW�UHDGV�DV�IROORZV��

��$Q�HOHFWULF�XWLOLW\�VKDOO�WDNH�DOO�QHFHVVDU\�VWHSV�WR�HQVXUH�WKDW�PHUFKDQW�SODQWV� DUH� FRQQHFWHG� WR� WKH� WUDQVPLVVLRQ� DQG� GLVWULEXWLRQ� V\VWHPV�ZLWKLQ�WKHLU� RSHUDWLRQDO� FRQWURO�� ,I� WKH� FRPPLVVLRQ� ILQGV�� DIWHU� QRWLFH� DQG�KHDULQJ��WKDW�DQ�HOHFWULF�XWLOLW\�KDV�SUHYHQWHG�RU�XQGXO\�GHOD\HG�WKH�DELOLW\�RI�WKH�SODQW�WR�FRQQHFW�WR�WKH�IDFLOLWLHV�RI�WKH�XWLOLW\��WKH�FRPPLVVLRQ�VKDOO�RUGHU�UHPHGLHV�GHVLJQHG�WR�PDNH�ZKROH�WKH�PHUFKDQW�SODQW��LQFOXGLQJ��EXW�QRW� OLPLWHG� WR�� UHDVRQDEOH�DWWRUQH\� IHHV��7KH� FRPPLVVLRQ�PD\�DOVR�RUGHU�ILQHV� RI� QRW� PRUH� WKDQ� �� SHU� GD\� WKDW� WKH� HOHFWULF� XWLOLW\� LV� LQ�YLRODWLRQ�RI�WKLV�VXEVHFWLRQ��

��$�PHUFKDQW�SODQW�PD\�VHOO�LWV�FDSDFLW\�WR�DOWHUQDWLYH�HOHFWULF�VXSSOLHUV��HOHFWULF� XWLOLWLHV�� PXQLFLSDO� HOHFWULF� XWLOLWLHV�� UHWDLO� FXVWRPHUV�� RU� RWKHU�SHUVRQV�� $� PHUFKDQW� SODQW� PDNLQJ� VDOHV� WR� UHWDLO� FXVWRPHUV� LV� DQ�DOWHUQDWLYH�HOHFWULF�VXSSOLHU�DQG�VKDOO�REWDLQ�D�OLFHQVH�XQGHU�VHFWLRQ��

�� 7KH� FRPPLVVLRQ� VKDOO� HVWDEOLVK� VWDQGDUGV� IRU� WKH� LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ� RI�PHUFKDQW�SODQWV�ZLWK�WKH�WUDQVPLVVLRQ�DQG�GLVWULEXWLRQ�V\VWHPV�RI�HOHFWULF�XWLOLWLHV��7KH�VWDQGDUGV�VKDOO�QRW�UHTXLUH�DQ�HOHFWULF�XWLOLW\� WR� LQWHUFRQQHFW�ZLWK� JHQHUDWLQJ� IDFLOLWLHV� ZLWK� D� FDSDFLW\� RI� OHVV� WKDQ� �� NLORZDWWV� IRU�SDUDOOHO� RSHUDWLRQV�� 7KH� VWDQGDUGV� VKDOO� EH� FRQVLVWHQW� ZLWK� JHQHUDOO\�DFFHSWHG� LQGXVWU\� SUDFWLFHV� DQG� JXLGHOLQHV� DQG� VKDOO� EH� HVWDEOLVKHG� WR�HQVXUH�WKH�UHOLDELOLW\�RI�HOHFWULF�VHUYLFH�DQG�WKH�VDIHW\�RI�FXVWRPHUV��XWLOLW\�

��7KLV�SUH�GDWHG� WKH� LPSRVLWLRQ�RI� WKH��PDUNHW�FDS� WKDW�ZDV� LPSRVHG� LQ��RQ� WKH�(OHFWULF�&KRLFH�PDUNHW��


Page 4 of 9

0(02��0LFKLJDQ�(,%&�'$7(��0DUFK��3$*(��RI��

��

HPSOR\HHV��DQG�WKH�JHQHUDO�SXEOLF��7KH�PHUFKDQW�SODQW�ZLOO�EH�UHVSRQVLEOH�IRU�DOO�FRVWV�DVVRFLDWHG�ZLWK�WKH�LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ�XQOHVV�WKH�FRPPLVVLRQ�KDV�RWKHUZLVH�DOORFDWHG�WKH�FRVWV�DQG�SURYLGHG�IRU�FRVW�UHFRYHU\�� WKLV�VHFWLRQ�GRHV�QRW�DSSO\� WR� LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQV�RU� WUDQVDFWLRQ� WKDW�DUH�VXEMHFW�WR�WKH�MXULVGLFWLRQ�RI�WKH�IHGHUDO�HQHUJ\�UHJXODWRU\�FRPPLVVLRQ��

,Q��WKH�&RPPLVVLRQ�PDGH�WKH�IROORZLQJ�REVHUYDWLRQV�DERXW�WKLV�6HFWLRQ��H�ZKHQ�LW�EHJDQ�WKH�SURFHVV�RI�SURPXOJDWLQJ�QHZ�LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ�VWDQGDUGV�LQ�UHVSRQVH�WR�6HFWLRQ��H��

6HFWLRQ� ��H� ZDV� HQDFWHG�� LQ� SDUW�� LQ� UHVSRQVH� WR� FRQFHUQ� WKDW� WKH�LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ�SURFHVV�FRXOG�EH�PDQLSXODWHG�WR�LPSHGH�FRPSHWLWRUV�WU\LQJ�WR� HQWHU� WKH� JHQHUDWLRQ� PDUNHW�� 7KH� &RPPLVVLRQ� IXOO\� HQGRUVHV� WKH�/HJLVODWXUHV� SROLF\� GHWHUPLQDWLRQ� WKDW� WKH� LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ� SURFHVV� VKRXOG�QRW�FRQVWLWXWH�D�EDUULHU�WR�PDUNHW�HQWU\��

/DWHU� LQ� WKDW� VDPH� 2UGHU�� WKH� &RPPLVVLRQ� H[DPLQHG� WKH� WLPHOLQHV� XQGHU� ZKLFK�LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQV� ZHUH� EHLQJ� PDGH� LQ� WKH� DEVHQFH� RI� &RPPLVVLRQ�HVWDEOLVKHG� VWDQGDUGV�� DQG�REVHUYHG��

7KH�&RPPLVVLRQ�ILQGV�WKDW�WKH�FRQFHUQ�H[SUHVVHG�E\�GHYHORSHUV�UHJDUGLQJ�WKH�H[LVWLQJ�SURFHGXUHV�KDV�PHULW��6HFWLRQ��H��RI�$FW��HPSRZHUV�WKH�&RPPLVVLRQ� WR� VDQFWLRQ� LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQV� WKDW� DUH� �XQGXO\� GHOD\HG��:LWKRXW�PRUH�GHILQLWH�VWDQGDUGV�UHJDUGLQJ�WKH�WLPH�WKDW�D�XWLOLW\�PD\�WDNH�WR� SURFHVV� DQ� DSSOLFDWLRQ�� SURMHFW� GHYHORSHUV� ZLOO� FRQWLQXH� WR� IDFH�XQFHUWDLQWLHV�DQG�GHOD\V�WKDW�FRXOG�IUXVWUDWH�GHYHORSPHQW�RI�D�FRPSHWLWLYH�PDUNHW� LQ� WKLV� VWDWH��$FFRUGLQJO\�� WKH�&RPPLVVLRQ� DJUHHV�ZLWK� WKH� 6WDII�WKDW� VWDQGDUGV� VKRXOG� EH� DGRSWHG� IRU� WKH� SURFHVVLQJ� RI� DSSOLFDWLRQV� WKDW�H[SHGLWH� WKH� UHYLHZ�SURFHVV�� SURYLGH�JUHDWHU� FHUWDLQW\� WR�GHYHORSHUV�� DQG�WDNH�LQWR�DFFRXQW�WKH�YDU\LQJ�VL]HV�DQG�FRPSOH[LWLHV�RI�PHUFKDQW�SODQWV��

,Q� D� IROORZ�RQ� 2UGHU� LVVXHG� RQ� 0DUFK� �� WKH� &RPPLVVLRQ� HODERUDWHG� RQ� LWV�FRQFHUQV�DERXW�XWLOLW\�GHOD\V�DQG�LQGHILQLWH�WLPHOLQHV��

7KH� &RPPLVVLRQ� DJUHHV� ZLWK� WKH� FRPPHQWLQJ� SDUWLHV� WKDW� WKH� HQWLUH�LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ�SURFHVV��IURP�WKH�ILOLQJ�RI� WKH�DSSOLFDWLRQ�WR� WKH�SK\VLFDO�LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ�ZLWK�WKH�XWLOLW\V�V\VWHP��VKRXOG�EH�VXEMHFW�WR�GHILQLWH�WLPH�GHDGOLQHV�� ZLWK� VSHFLILF� SHULRGV� SURYLGHG� IRU� PHHWLQJ� PDMRU� PLOHVWRQHV��7KH� &RPPLVVLRQ� ZLOO� QRW� SHUPLW� XWLOLWLHV� WR� VHW� RSHQ�HQGHG� WLPHIUDPHV�WKDW�LQYLWH�GHOD\��(DFK�XWLOLW\�VKRXOG�EH�DFFRXQWDEOH�IRU�PLVVHG�GHDGOLQHV�WKDW�DUH�QRW�DWWULEXWDEOH�WR�WKH�DSSOLFDQW��

��)HEUXDU\��2UGHU�LQ�&DVH�1R��8��S��HPSKDVLV�DGGHG�� ,G��S��HPSKDVLV�DGGHG��0DUFK��2UGHU�DQG�1RWLFH�RI�+HDULQJ�LQ�&DVH�1RV��8��DQG��S��HPSKDVLV�DGGHG��


Page 5 of 9

0(02��0LFKLJDQ�(,%&�'$7(��0DUFK��3$*(��RI��

��

,W�LV�WKXV�SODLQ�WKDW�WKH�&RPPLVVLRQV�,QWHUFRQQHFWLRQ�6WDQGDUGV�ZHUH�ILUVW�HVWDEOLVKHG�LQ�WKH�HDUO\��V� LQ� UHVSRQVH� WR� WKH�VWDWXWRU\�GLUHFWLYH� WKDW�PHUFKDQW�SODQWV�EH� LQWHUFRQQHFWHG� WR�WKH�XWLOLW\�ZLWKRXW�XQGXH�GHOD\��DQG�WKDW�WKH�&RPPLVVLRQ�VKDUHG�WKH�/HJLVODWXUHV�FRQFHUQV�DERXW�XWLOLW\�GHOD\V�DQG�LQGHILQLWH� WLPHOLQHV� WKDW�GHYHORSHUV�ZHUH�WKHQ�H[SHULHQFLQJ�LQ�WKH�DEVHQFH�RI�VXFK�UXOHV��

�� 1HW�0HWHULQJ�'*��

7KH� LQLWLDO� LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ� UXOHV� HVWDEOLVKHG� LQ� �� ZHUH� UHYLVHG� LQ� �� WR�DFFRPPRGDWH� WKH� QHW�PHWHULQJ� SURJUDP� UHTXLUHG� XQGHU� WKH�&OHDQ� DQG�5HQHZDEOH�(QHUJ\� DQG�:DVWH� 5HGXFWLRQ� $FW�� 3$� �� RI� �� ZKLFK� ZDV� LWVHOI� VXEVHTXHQWO\� DPHQGHG� LQ� ��UHVXOWLQJ� LQ� WKH� FXUUHQW� �GLVWULEXWHG� JHQHUDWLRQ�� SURJUDP�� 7KH� VL]H� RI� DQ� �HOLJLEOH� HOHFWULF�JHQHUDWRU�� LV� OLPLWHG� WR��N:�DW� D� VLQJOH� VLWH��0DQ\�RI� WKH�NH\�SURYLVLRQV� FDQ�EH� IRXQG�DW�0&/�� LQFOXGLQJ� UHTXLUHPHQWV� IRU� �>V@WDWHZLGH� XQLIRUP� LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ� UHTXLUHPHQWV�IRU�DOO�HOLJLEOH�HOHFWULF�JHQHUDWRUV��«�GHVLJQHG�WR�SURWHFW�HOHFWULF�XWLOLW\�ZRUNHUV�DQG�HTXLSPHQW�DQG�WKH�JHQHUDO�SXEOLF��7KH�036&�LV�LQ�WKH�SURFHVV�RI�XSGDWLQJ�LWV�LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ�UXOHV��EXW�LQ�WKH�PHDQWLPH��WKH�FXUUHQW�UXOHV�UHPDLQ�LQ�HIIHFW�DQG�FRQWUROOLQJ��

8QGHU�WKH�FXUUHQW�036&�UXOHV��LI�D�XWLOLW\�UHDFKHV�WKH�SURJUDP�FDS��LW�PXVW�SURYLGH�QRWLFH�WR� WKH�036&�DQG� LWV�FXVWRPHUV� WKDW� LWV�SURJUDP�LV�FORVHG�DQG� WKDW�QR�QHZ�DSSOLFDWLRQV�ZLOO�EH�DFFHSWHG��6HH�5XOH��5��7KH�ODQJXDJH�XVHG�WKHUH�LV�PDQGDWRU\��WKH�HOHFWULF�SURYLGHU�«�VKDOO�SURYLGH�QRWLFH«��3UHVXPDEO\��D�XWLOLW\�FDQ�YROXQWDULO\�REOLJDWH�LWVHOI�WR�GR�DGGLWLRQDO�LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQV��EXW��DV�QRWHG�DERYH��XQGHU�VXFK�FLUFXPVWDQFHV��FXVWRPHUV�PD\�QRW�EH�DEOH� WR�UHO\�RQ�WKH�SURWHFWLRQV�RI�WKH�WLPHOLQHV�DQG�H[SHQVH�OLPLWDWLRQV�SURYLGHG�E\�WKH�H[LVWLQJ�UXOHV��

$V� GLVFXVVHG� IXUWKHU� EHORZ�� LQ� LWV� UDWH� FDVH� ILOHG� RQ� )HEUXDU\� �� 8��&RQVXPHUV�(QHUJ\�KDV�VXJJHVWHG�WKDW�FXVWRPHUV�FRXOG�EH�LQWHUFRQQHFWHG�DV�3853$�4)V��

�� 3853$�4XDOLI\LQJ�)DFLOLWLHV��

3853$�JUDQWV�FHUWDLQ� ULJKWV� WR�FHUWDLQ� UHQHZDEOH�DQG�KLJKO\�HIILFLHQW� IDFLOLWLHV� WKDW�DUH�DEOH�WR�PHHW�FHUWDLQ�FULWHULD�±�WKHVH�DUH�NQRZQ�DV��4XDOLI\LQJ�)DFLOLWLHV��RU��4)V��$PRQJ�WKH�ULJKWV� JUDQWHG� XQGHU� WKH� )(5&V� UXOHV� DUH� D� ULJKW� WR� LQWHUFRQQHFW� ZLWK� WKH� ORFDO� XWLOLW\�� DQ\�HOHFWULF�XWLOLW\�VKDOO�PDNH�VXFK�LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ�ZLWK�DQ\�TXDOLI\LQJ�IDFLOLW\�DV�PD\�EH�QHFHVVDU\�WR� DFFRPSOLVK� SXUFKDVHV� RU� VDOHV� XQGHU� WKLV� VXESDUW�� 7KH� REOLJDWLRQ� WR� SD\� IRU� DQ\�LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ�FRVWV�VKDOO�EH�GHWHUPLQHG� LQ�DFFRUGDQFH�ZLWK�� &)5��F��)(5&V� UXOHV� H[SOLFLWO\� DVVLJQ� WR� WKH�6WDWH� WKH� WDVN�RI�GHWHUPLQLQJ�KRZ� WKH�REOLJDWLRQV� WR�SD\�LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ�FRVWV�DUH�WR�EH�DVVLJQHG��6HH��&)5��:KDW�3853$�GRHV�QRW�GR�LV� WR�PDQGDWH� WKH� VHWWLQJ�RI� VSHFLILF� WLPHOLQHV�E\� WKH�6WDWH��ZKLFK� LV� OHIW� WR� WKH�6WDWH� WR� LPSOHPHQW��0LFKLJDQ�KDV�KDQGOHG�3853$�4)� LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ� WKURXJK� WKH� VDPH� LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ�VWDQGDUGV�WKDW� LW� KDQGOHV� PHUFKDQW� SODQWV� DQG� GLVWULEXWHG� JHQHUDWLRQ�� %HLQJ� FHUWLILHG� DV� D� 4)� �ZKLFK� LV�

��6HH�0&/��E��0&/��D��6HH�KWWSV��ZZZ�PLFKLJDQ�JRY�PSVF��B��B��B��KWPO


Page 6 of 9

0(02��0LFKLJDQ�(,%&�'$7(��0DUFK��3$*(��RI��

��

UHODWLYHO\� VLPSOH�� FDQ� WKXV� SURYLGH� DQRWKHU� PHDQV� WR� UHTXLUH� WKH� XWLOLW\� WR� LQWHUFRQQHFW� D�SURMHFW�XQGHU�H[LVWLQJ�UXOHV��

�� 7HUPV�RI�,QWHUFRQQHFWLRQ�

%HIRUH�PRYLQJ�RQ�WR�GLVFXVV�UDWHV��ZH�VKRXOG�QRWH�WKDW�QHW�PHWHULQJ�'*�FXVWRPHUV�KDYH�VRPH� EHQHILWV� ±� DV� UHTXLUHG� E\� WKH� /HJLVODWXUH� �� LQ� WKHLU� WHUPV� RI� LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ� WKDW� RWKHU�FXVWRPHUV� GR� QRW� KDYH��7KXV�� RQFH� WKH� SURJUDP�FDS� LV�PHW�� WKRVH� UXOHV� WKDW� DSSO\� RQO\� WR� QHW�PHWHULQJ�'*� FXVWRPHUV� ZLOO� QRW� DSSO\� WR� RWKHU� VLPLODU� FXVWRPHUV� RI� WKH� VDPH� VL]H� ZKR� DUH�RXWVLGH�RI�WKH�FDS��:H�KDYH�QRW�GRQH�DQ�H[KDXVWLYH�UHYLHZ�RI�WKH�YDULRXV�UXOHV�WR�GHWHUPLQH�DOO�WKH�GLIIHUHQFHV�EHWZHHQ�WKH�VHWV�RI�UXOHV�WKDW�PLJKW�DSSO\��EXW�WKHUH�DSSHDU�WR�EH�VRPH�VKRUWHQHG�WLPHOLQHV�XQGHU�WKH�QHW�PHWHULQJ�UXOHV�RI�ZKLFK�FXVWRPHUV�ZRXOG�ORVH�WKH�EHQHILW��,I�D�FXVWRPHU�LV�DEOH�WR�LQWHUFRQQHFW�DV�D�3853$�4)�DIWHU�WKH�FDS�LV�UHDFKHG��FRVWV�DQG�IHHV�ZRXOG�DSSHDU�WR�UHPDLQ� DSSUR[LPDWHO\� WKH� VDPH� IRU� &DWHJRU\� �� SURMHFWV� �WKRVH� RI� �� N:� � RU� OHVV�� ZKLOH�&DWHJRULHV� �� DQG� �� SURMHFWV� �L�H�� WKRVH� EHWZHHQ� �� N:� DQG� �� N:�� DQG� PHWKDQH� GLJHVWHUV�JUHDWHU� WKDQ� �� N:� � EXW� QRW� PRUH� WKDQ� �� N:�� UHVSHFWLYHO\�� ZRXOG� IDFH� SRWHQWLDO� FRVW�LQFUHDVHV� IRU� LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ� GXH� WR� DQ� LQFUHDVH� LQ� WKH� DSSOLFDWLRQ� IHH� FRVWV�� DQG� DQ� LQFUHDVHG�REOLJDWLRQ� WR� SD\� IRU� XWLOLW\� WHVWLQJ� DQG� LQVSHFWLRQ�� 6R�� HYHQ� LI� VXFK� FXVWRPHUV�ZHUH� DEOH� WR�HIIHFWLYHO\�JDLQ�DFFHVV�WR�WKH�LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ�UXOHV�YLD�3853$��LQ�GRLQJ�VR�WKH\�ORVH�VRPH�RI�WKH�EHQHILWV�WKH�/HJLVODWXUH�JUDQWHG�WR�QHW�PHWHULQJ��'*�FXVWRPHUV��

%� 5DWHV�IRU�3XUFKDVHV�

2QFH� LQWHUFRQQHFWHG�� WKH� FXVWRPHU� PXVW� FRQVLGHU� WKH� UDWH� WKDW� WKH� XWLOLW\� ZLOO� SD\� IRU�HQHUJ\�SURYLGHG�WR�WKH�XWLOLW\�WKURXJK�WKH�LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ��2QFH�WKH�FDS�LV�H[FHHGHG��WKH�XWLOLW\�QR�ORQJHU�LV�REOLJDWHG�WR�SD\�XQGHU�WKH�QHW�PHWHULQJ�RU�'*�WDULII��DV�WKH�FDVH�PD\�EH��$V�0LNH�%\UQH��&22�RI�WKH�&RPPLVVLRQ��WHVWLILHG�RQ�0DUFK��WKH�&RPPLVVLRQ�GHWHUPLQHG�D�FRVW�RI�VHUYLFH�EDVHG�RXWIORZ�FUHGLW�UDWH�IRU�'*�FXVWRPHUV�LQ�WKH�'7(�UDWH�FDVH�ODVW�\HDU��,Q�WKHLU�)HEUXDU\� �� WHVWLPRQ\� EHIRUH� WKH� 6HQDWH� (QHUJ\� DQG� 7HFKQRORJ\� &RPPLWWHH�� ERWK�%UDQGRQ� +RIPHLVWHU�� 6HQLRU� 93� RI� *RYHUQPHQWDO�� 5HJXODWRU\� DQG� 3XEOLF� $IIDLUV� IRU� &06�(QHUJ\�&RUSRUDWLRQ�DQG�&RQVXPHUV�(QHUJ\�&RPSDQ\��DQG�5HQ]H�+RHNVHPD��93�RI�&RUSRUDWH�DQG� � *RYHUQPHQWDO� $IIDLUV� IRU� '7(� (QHUJ\�� VWDWHG� WKDW� WKHLU� FRPSDQLHV� ZRXOG� FRQWLQXH� WR�SXUFKDVH�SRZHU�IURP�FXVWRPHUV�ZKR�ZDQWHG�WR�LQVWDOO�VRODU�SURMHFWV�DQG�LQWHUFRQQHFW�WKHP�DIWHU�WKH� FDSV� KDG� EHHQ� H[FHHGHG� IRU� WKHLU� UHVSHFWLYH� FRPSDQLHV�� 0U�� +RIPHLVWHU� VWDWHG� WKDW�&RQVXPHUV�SURSRVHG�WR�GR�VR�DW�WKH�FXVWRPHUV�FKRLFH�RI�HLWKHU�WKH�ODWHVW�FRPSHWLWLYH�ELG�SULFH�IRU�VRODU��RU�WKH�0,62�ZKROHVDOH�HQHUJ\�PDUNHW�SULFH��0U��+RHNVHPD�VLPSO\�VWDWHG�WKDW�D�UDWH�ZRXOG� KDYH� WR� EH� VHW� WKDW� ZRXOG� UHIOHFW� WKH� SURSHU� FRVWV� DQG� EHQHILWV�� DQG� QRWHG� WKDW� '7(�EHOLHYHV� WKDW� WKH� FXUUHQW� LQIORZ�RXWIORZ� PRGHO� LV� LQHTXLWDEOH� EHFDXVH�� LQ� KLV� RSLQLRQ�� LW� ERWK�XQGHUSD\V�WKH�XWLOLW\�IRU�WKH�FXVWRPHUV�XVH�RI�WKH�JULG��DQG�RYHUSD\V�WKH�FXVWRPHU�IRU�WKH�HQHUJ\�SURYLGHG��2Q�IXUWKHU�TXHVWLRQLQJ��0U��+RHNVHPD�DOVR�DGPLWWHG�WKDW�EHIRUH�DQ\�UDWH�FRXOG�EH�SXW�

��6HH��KWWSV��ZZZ�IHUF�JRY�LQGXVWULHV�HOHFWULF�JHQ�LQIR�TXDO�IDF�ZKDW�LV�DVS��6HH�WKH�IHH�FKDUW�LQ�036&V�LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ�UXOHV��DW�5��5XOH��'7(�(OHFWULF�&RPSDQ\��&DVH�1R��8��GDWHG�0D\��$V�GLVFXVVHG�EHORZ��&RQVXPHUV�ILOHG�WDULII�GRHV�QRW�SURYLGH�VXFK�D�FKRLFH��EXW�RQO\�WKH�PDUNHW�UDWH��


Page 7 of 9

0(02��0LFKLJDQ�(,%&�'$7(��0DUFK��3$*(��RI��

��

LQWR� SODFH� WR� SD\� VXFK� FXVWRPHUV�� LW� ZRXOG� KDYH� WR� EH� UHYLHZHG� DQG� DSSURYHG� E\� WKH�&RPPLVVLRQ��

,Q�LWV�UDWH�FDVH�ILOHG�RQ�)HEUXDU\��8��&RQVXPHUV�(QHUJ\�KDV�VXJJHVWHG�WKDW�FXVWRPHUV�FRXOG�EH�LQWHUFRQQHFWHG�DV�3853$�4)V��DQG�LV�SURSRVLQJ�WDULII�PRGLILFDWLRQV�WR�HQDEOH�WKH�XWLOLW\�WR�SD\�VXFK�FXVWRPHUV�WKH�UHDO�WLPH�PDUNHW��/03��0,62�HQHUJ\�SULFH�IRU�WKH�SRZHU�GHOLYHUHG��7KLV�LV�D�UDWH�ZHOO�EHORZ�WKDW�RIIHUHG�WR�FXUUHQW�QHW�PHWHULQJ�'*�FXVWRPHUV��,W�LV�DOVR�D�FRQWURYHUVLDO�UDWH�WKDW�KDV�EHHQ�FULWLFL]HG�E\�LQWHUYHQLQJ�SDUWLHV�LQ�036&�3853$�FDVHV��DQG�LV�DOVR�FULWLFL]HG�DV�SDUW�RI�)(5&�&RPPLVVLRQHU�5LFKDUG�*OLFN¶V�GLVVHQW�LQ�WKH�FXUUHQW�)(5&�3853$�1235��,I�WKH�&RPPLVVLRQ�DSSURYHV�WKHVH�WDULII�FKDQJHV��WKHQ�LW�LV�DOVR�ZRUWK�QRWLQJ�WKDW�&RQVXPHUV�KDV�SURSRVHG�LQ�LWV�WDULII�WKDW�WKH�XWLOLW\��KDV�WKH�ULJKW�WR�UHIXVH�WR�FRQWUDFW�IRU�WKH�SXUFKDVH� RI� HQHUJ\�� DQG� VR� FDQ� UHIXVH� WR� FRQWUDFW�ZLWK� DQ\� FXVWRPHU�� 6XFK� D� SURSRVDO� LV� QRW�FRQVLVWHQW� ZLWK� &RQVXPHUV� FXUUHQW� REOLJDWLRQV� XQGHU� WKH� VHWWOHPHQW� DJUHHPHQW� LQ� 8��ZKHUH�LW�PXVW�JLYH�D�FRQWUDFW�WR�DOO�4)V�DW�RU�EHORZ��N:��

,,,� 6XPPDU\�DQG�&RQFOXVLRQ�

8S� XQWLO� �� FXVWRPHUV� VHHNLQJ� WR� LQWHUFRQQHFW� ZLWK� WKH� XWLOLW\� KDG� QR� VWDWXWRU\� RU�UHJXODWRU\�ULJKW�WR�GR�VR�XQGHU�0LFKLJDQ�ODZ�WKDW�ZH�DUH�DZDUH�RI��7KH\�KDG�WR�QHJRWLDWH�VXFK�LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQV�ZLWK�WKH�XWLOLWLHV��OHDGLQJ�WR�FRPSODLQWV�RYHU�XQFHUWDLQ�WLPHOLQHV�DQG�GHOD\V��,Q�� XQGHU� WKH� DXWKRULW\� RI�0&/� ��H�� WKH�036&� SURPXOJDWHG� LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ� UXOHV� IRU�PHUFKDQW�SODQWV�WKDW�ZHUH�ODWHU�H[SDQGHG�WR�LQFOXGH�UXOHV�IRU�QHW�PHWHULQJ�'*�FXVWRPHUV��7KHVH�UXOHV� KDYH� DOVR� EHHQ� DSSOLHG� WR� 3853$� 4)� SURMHFWV� VHHNLQJ� LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ�� 7KH�LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ� UXOHV� DUH� FXUUHQWO\� XQGHU� UHYLHZ� DW� WKH� 036&� DQG� ZLOO� XQGHUJR� D� QHZ�UXOHPDNLQJ�SURFHVV�LQ�RUGHU�WR�EH�XSGDWHG�IROORZLQJ�WKH��$FWV��DQG��

0HDQZKLOH�� WKHUH� KDV� QRW� EHHQ� D� FRPSUHKHQVLYH� UHYLHZ� E\� WKH� /HJLVODWXUH� RI� WKH�LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ�VWDWXWRU\�UHTXLUHPHQWV��GHVSLWH�LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ�KDYLQJ�EHHQ�DGGUHVVHG�LQ�VHYHUDO�VSHFLILF� UHJXODWRU\�FDWHJRULHV�RQ�RFFDVLRQ�� ,W�DSSHDUV� WKLV�KDV� UHVXOWHG� LQ�D� UHJXODWRU\�JDS�QRZ�EHLQJ�SRWHQWLDOO\�IDFHG�E\�FXVWRPHUV�ZKR�ZLVK�WR�LQWHUFRQQHFW�RQFH�WKH�XWLOLWLHV�KDYH�PHW�WKHLU�QHW�PHWHULQJ�'*�FDSV��

2QFH�WKH�QHW�PHWHULQJ�'*�FDS�LV�H[FHHGHG�DQG�FXVWRPHUV�DUH�QR�ORQJHU�HOLJLEOH�WR�DFFHVV�WKH� LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ�UXOHV�XQGHU� WKRVH�SURYLVLRQV�� WKH�RQO\�RWKHU�FDWHJRU\�ZKLFK�PLJKW�DSSO\� WR�SURMHFWV�RI�WKDW�VL]H�LV�D�3853$�4)��:KLOH�EHLQJ�D�3853$�4)�PD\�DOORZ�DFFHVV�WR�WKH�EHQHILWV�RI�WKH�LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ�UXOHV��FXVWRPHUV�ZRXOG�ORVH�WKH�WLPHOLQH�DQG��SULFH�UHTXLUHPHQWV�RI�WKH�QHW�PHWHULQJ�'*�SURJUDP��DQG�ZRXOG�EH�VXEMHFW�WR�D�QHZ�SULFLQJ�PHFKDQLVP��ZKLFK�ZRXOG�QHHG�WR�EH�DSSURYHG�E\�WKH�&RPPLVVLRQ��

��'LVVHQW� LQ�3DUW�RI�&RPPLVVLRQHU�5LFKDUG�*OLFN�5HJDUGLQJ�)(5&¶V�1RWLFH�RI�3URSRVHG�5XOHPDNLQJ� WR�8SGDWH� 3853$� 5HJXODWLRQV�� 'RFNHW� 1RV�� 50�� $'�� GDWHG� 6HSWHPEHU� �� KWWSV��ZZZ�IHUF�JRY�PHGLD�VWDWHPHQWV�VSHHFKHV�JOLFN��JOLFN�(��DVS��;P(TWL).L��


Page 8 of 9

0(02��0LFKLJDQ�(,%&�'$7(��0DUFK��3$*(��RI��

��

7KHUH� LV� DW� SUHVHQW� QR� FOHDU� WDULII� UDWH� VWUXFWXUH� WKDW� ZRXOG� DSSO\� WR� '*�QHW� PHWHULQJ�FXVWRPHUV� VHHNLQJ� WR� LQWHUFRQQHFW� DIWHU� WKH� FDS� LV� H[FHHGHG�� &RQVXPHUV� (QHUJ\� KDV� QRZ�SURSRVHG�D�QHZ�WDULII�EDVHG�RQ�PRYLQJ�WKHVH�FXVWRPHUV�WR�3853$�DQG�D�0,62�PDUNHW�HQHUJ\�UDWH��'7(�ZRXOG�KDYH�WR�VHHN�D�VLPLODU�QHZ�UDWH�VWUXFWXUH�ZKLFK�ZLOO�KDYH�WR�EH�DSSURYHG�ILUVW�WKURXJK� D� ��PRQWK� 036&� SURFHHGLQJ�� 7KLV� PHDQV� WKDW� WKH� WLPH� DQG� H[SHQVH� RI� DQ�DGPLQLVWUDWLYH�UDWH�FDVH�EHIRUH� WKH�036&�SXUVXDQW� WR� WKH�0LFKLJDQ�$GPLQLVWUDWLYH�3URFHGXUHV�$FW�ZLOO�OLNHO\�EH�UHTXLUHG�EHIRUH�VXFK�FXVWRPHUV�ZLOO�EH�DEOH�WR�EH�SDLG�E\�WKH�XWLOLW\��*LYHQ�WKLV�SDVW�KLVWRU\��DQG�WKLV�DSSDUHQW�UHJXODWRU\�JDS��LW�LV�QRW�XQUHDVRQDEOH��WKHUHIRUH��IRU�FXVWRPHUV�WR�KDYH�FRQFHUQV�WKDW�PHUH�JHQHUDO�YHUEDO�DVVXUDQFHV�IURP�XWLOLW\�H[HFXWLYHV�WKDW�'*�V\VWHPV�ZLOO�FRQWLQXH� WR� EH� LQWHUFRQQHFWHG�� VXFK� DV� WKRVH� SURYLGHG� LQ� UHFHQW� WHVWLPRQ\� EHIRUH� WKH� 6HQDWH�(QHUJ\� DQG� 7HFKQRORJ\� &RPPLWWHH�� PD\� QRW� EH� VXIILFLHQW� WR� HQVXUH� WLPHO\� LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQ�XQGHU� UHDVRQDEOH� WHUPV�RQFH� WKH� FDS�KDV�EHHQ�H[FHHGHG��DQG�SD\PHQW�RI�D� UHDVRQDEOH� UDWH� IRU�SRZHU�GHOLYHUHG�WR�WKH�XWLOLW\��

��9LGHR�DYDLODEOH�DW��KWWSV��PLVHQDWH�YLHELW�FRP�SOD\HU�SKS"KDVK $N7'0WP4K<��


Page 9 of 9


Page 1 of 2


Page 2 of 2

Douglas B Jester Page 1 of 9 1/9/2018

Douglas B. Jester

Personal Information

Contact Information:

115 W Allegan Street, Suite 710 Lansing, MI 48933 517-337-7527 [email protected]

Professional experience

January 2011 – present 5 Lakes Energy Partner

Co-owner of a consulting firm working to advance the clean energy economy in Michigan and beyond. Consulting engagements with foundations, startups, and large mature businesses have included work on public policy, business strategy, market development, technology collaboration, project finance, and export development concerning energy efficiency, smart grid, renewable generation, electric vehicle infrastructure, and utility regulation and rate design. Policy director for renewable energy ballot initiative and Michigan energy legislation advocacy. Supported startup of the Energy Innovation Business Council, a trade association of clean energy businesses. Expert witness in utility regulation cases. Developed integrated resource planning models for use in ten states’ compliance with the Clean Power Plan.

February 2010 - December 2010 Michigan Department of Energy, Labor and Economic Growth Senior Energy Policy Advisor

Advisor to the Chief Energy Officer of the State of Michigan with primary focus on institutionalizing energy efficiency and renewable energy strategies and policies and developing clean energy businesses in Michigan. Provided several policy analyses concerning utility regulation, grid-integrated storage, performance contracting, feed-in tariffs, and low-income energy efficiency and assistance. Participated in Pluggable Electric Vehicle Task Force, Smart Grid Collaborative, Michigan Prosperity Initiative, and Green Partnership Team. Managed development of social-media-based community for energy practitioners. Organized conference on Biomass Waste to Energy.

August 2008 - February 2010 Rose International Business Development Consultant - Smart Grid Employed by Verizon Business’ exclusive external staffing agency for

the purpose of providing business and solution development consultation services to Verizon Business in the areas of Smart Grid services and transportation management services.

MPSC Case No. U-20679Exhibit EIB-8 (DBJ-1)

Page 1 of 9

mailto:[email protected]


December 2007 - March 2010 Efficient Printers Inc President/Co-Owner Co-founder and co-owner with Keith Carlson of a corporation formed for

the purpose of acquiring J A Thomas Company, a sole proprietorship owned by Keith Carlson. Recognized as Sacramento County (California) 2008 Supplier of the Year and Washoe County (Nevada) Association for Retarded Citizens 2008 Employer of the Year. Business operations discontinued by asset sale to focus on associated printing software services of IT Services Corporation.

August 2007 - present IT Services Corporation President/Owner Founder, co-owner, and President of a startup business intended to

provide advanced IT consulting services and to acquire or develop managed services in selected niches, currently focused on developing e-commerce solutions for commercial printing with software-as-a-service.

2004 – August 2007 Automated License Systems Chief Technology Officer Member of four-person executive team and member of board of

directors of a privately-held corporation specializing in automated systems for the sale of hunting and fishing licenses, park campground reservations, and in automated background check systems. Executive responsible for project management, network and data center operations, software and product development. Brought company through mezzanine financing and sold it to Active Networks.

2000 - 2004 WorldCom/MCI Director, Government Application Solutions Executive responsible in various combinations for line of business sales,

state and local government product marketing, project management, network and data center operations, software and product development, and contact center operations for specialized government process outsourcing business. Principal lines of business were vehicle emissions testing, firearm background checks, automated hunting and fishing license systems, automated appointment scheduling, and managed application hosting services. Also responsible for managing order entry, tracking, and service support systems for numerous large federal telecommunications contracts such as the US Post Office, Federal Aviation Administration, and Navy-Marine Corps Intranet.

Increased annual line-of-business revenue from $64 million to $93 million, improved EBITDA from approximately 2% to 27%, and retained all customers, in context of corporate scandal and bankruptcy.

Repeatedly evaluated in top 10% of company executive management on annual performance evaluations.


Page 2 of 9


1999-2000 Compuware Corporation Senior Project Manager Senior project manager, on customer site with five project managers

and team of approximately 80, to migrate a major dental insurer from a mainframe environment to internet-enabled client-server environment.

1995 - 1999 City of East Lansing, Michigan Mayor and Councilmember Elected chief executive of the City of East Lansing, a sophisticated city

of 52,000 residents with a council-manager government employing about 350 staff and with an annual budget of about $47 million. Major accomplishments included incorporation of public asset depreciation into budgets with consequent improvements in public facilities and services, complete rewrite and modernization of city charter, greatly intensified cooperation between the City of East Lansing and the East Lansing Public Schools, significant increases in recreational facilities and services, major revisions to housing code, initiation of revision of the City Master Plan, facilitation of the merger of the Capital Area Transportation Authority and Michigan State University bus systems, initiation of a major downtown redevelopment project, City government efficiency improvements, and numerous other policy initiatives. Member of Michigan Municipal League policy committee on Transportation and Environment and principal writer of league policy on these subjects (still substantially unchanged as of 2009).

1995-1999 Michigan Department of Natural Resources Chief Information Officer Executive responsibility for end-user computing, data center operations,

wide area network, local area network, telephony, public safety radio, videoconferencing, application development and support, Y2K readiness for Departments of Natural Resources and Environmental Quality. Directed staff of about 110. Member of MERIT Affiliates Board and of the Great Lakes Commission’s Great Lakes Information Network (GLIN) Board.

1990-1995 Michigan Department of Natural Resources Senior Fisheries Manager Responsible for coordinating management of Michigan’s Great Lakes

fisheries worth about $4 billion per year including fish stocking and sport and commercial fishing regulation decisions, fishery monitoring and research programs, information systems development, market and economic analyses, litigation, legislative analysis and negotiation. University relations. Extensive involvement in regulation of steam electric and hydroelectric power plants.

Served as agency expert on natural resource damage assessment, for all resources and causes.

Considerable involvement with Great Lakes Fishery Commission, including: o Co-chair of Strategic Great Lakes Fishery Management Plan

working group


Page 3 of 9


o Member of Lake Erie and Lake St. Clair Committees o Chair, Council of Lake Committees o Member, Sea Lamprey Control Advisory Committee o St Clair and Detroit River Areas of Concern Planning Committees

1989-1990 American Fisheries Society Editor, North American Journal of Fisheries Management Full responsibility for publication of one of the premier academic journals

in natural resource management.

1984 - 1989 Michigan Department of Natural Resources Fisheries Administrator Assistant to Chief of Fisheries, responsible for strategic planning,

budgets, personnel management, public relations, market and economic analysis, and information systems. Department of Natural Resources representative to Governor’s Cabinet Council on Economic Development. Extensive involvement in regulation of steam electric and hydroelectric power plants.

1983-present Michigan State University Adjunct Instructor Irregular lecturer in various undergraduate and graduate fisheries and

wildlife courses and informal graduate student research advisor in fisheries and wildlife and in parks and recreation marketing.

1977 – 1984 Michigan Department of Natural Resources Fisheries Research Biologist Simulation modeling & policy analysis of Great Lakes ecosystems.

Development of problem-oriented management records system and “epidemiological” approaches to managing inland fisheries.

Modeling and valuation of impacts power plants on natural resources and recreation.

Education 1991-1995 Michigan State University PhD Candidate, Environmental Economics Coursework completed, dissertation not pursued due to decision to pursue different career direction. 1980-1981 University of British Columbia Non-degree Program, Institute of Animal Resource Ecology 1974-1977 Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University MS Fisheries and Wildlife Sciences MS Statistics and Operations Research 1971-1974 New Mexico State University BIS Mathematics, Biology, and Fine Arts


Page 4 of 9


Citizenship and Community Involvement

Youth Soccer Coach, East Lansing Soccer League, 1987-89

Co-organizer, East Lansing Community Unity, 1992-1993

Bailey Community Association Board, 1993-1995

East Lansing Commission on the Environment, 1993-1995 East Lansing Street Lighting Advisory Committee, 1994

Councilmember, City of East Lansing, 1995-1999

Mayor, City of East Lansing, 1995-1997

East Lansing Downtown Development Authority Board Member, 1995-1999

East Lansing Transportation Commission, 1999-2004

East Lansing Non-Profit Housing and Neighborhood Services Corporation Board Member, 2001-2004

Lansing – East Lansing Smart Zone Board of Directors, 2007-present

Council on Labor and Economic Growth, State of Michigan, by appointment of the Governor, May 2009 – May 2012 East Lansing Downtown Development Authority Board Member and Vice-Chair, 2010 – present. East Lansing Brownfield Authority Board Member and Vice-Chair, 2010 – present. East Lansing Downtown Management Board and Chair, 2010 – 2016 East Lansing City Center Condominium Association Board Member, 2015 – present.


Page 5 of 9


Douglas Jester Specific Energy-Related Accomplishments Unrelated to Employment Member of Michigan SAVES initial Advisory Board. Michigan SAVES is a financing program

for building energy efficiency measures initiated by the State of Michigan Public Service Commission and administered under contract by Public Sector Consultants. Program launched in 2010.

Member of Michigan Green Jobs Initiative, representing the Council for Labor and Economic Growth.

Participated in Lansing Board of Water and Light Integrated Resource Planning, leading to their recent completion of a combined cycle natural gas power plant that also provides district heating to downtown Lansing.

In graduate school, participated in development of database and algorithms for optimal routing of major transmission lines for Virginia Electric Power Company (now part of Dominion Resources).

Commissioner of the Lansing Board of Water and Light, representing East Lansing. December 2017 – present.

For 5 Lakes Energy Participant by invitation in the Michigan Public Service Commission Smart Grid Collaborative,

authoring recommendations on data access, application priorities, and electric vehicle integration to the grid.

Participant by invitation in the Michigan Public Service Commission Energy Optimization Collaborative, a regular meeting and action collaborative of parties involved in the Energy Optimization programs required of utilities by Michigan law enacted in 2008.

Participant by invitation in Michigan Public Service Commission Solar Work Group, including presentations and written comments on value of solar, including energy, capacity, avoided health and environmental damages, hedge value, and ancillary services.

Participant by invitation in Michigan Senate Energy and Technology Committee stakeholder work group preliminary to introduction of a comprehensive legislative package.

Participant by invitation in Michigan Public Service Commission PURPA Avoided Cost Technical Advisory Committee.

Participant by invitation in Michigan Public Service Commission Standby Rate Working Group.

Participant by invitation in Michigan Public Service Commission Street Lighting Collaborative. Participant by invitation in State of Michigan Agency for Energy Technical Advisory

Committee on Clean Power Plan implementation. Conceived, obtained funding, and developed open access integrated resource planning tools

(State Tool for Electricity Emissions Reduction aka STEER) for State compliance with the Clean Power Plan:

o For Energy Foundation - Michigan and Iowa o For Advanced Energy Economy Institute – Arkansas, Florida, Illinois, Ohio,

Pennsylvania, Virginia o For The Solar Foundation - Georgia and North Carolina

Presentations to Michigan Agency for Energy and the Institute for Public Utilities Michigan Forum on Strategies for Michigan to Comply with the Clean Power Plan.

Participant in Midcontinent Independent Systems Operator stakeholder processes on behalf of Michigan Citizens Against Rate Excess and the MISO Consumer Representatives Sector, including Resource Adequacy Committee, Loss of Load Expectation Working Group, Transmission Expansion Working Group, Demand Response Working Group, Independent Load Forecasting Working Group, and Clean Power Plan Working Group.

Expert witness before the Michigan Public Service Commission in various cases, including:


Page 6 of 9


o Case U-17473 (Consumers Energy Plant Retirement Securitization) o Case U-17096-R (Indiana Michigan 2013 PSCR Reconciliation) o Case U-17301 (Consumers Energy Renewable Energy Plan 2013 Biennial Review); o Case U-17302 (DTE Energy Renewable Energy Plan 2013 Biennial Review); o Case U-17317 (Consumers Energy 2014 PSCR Plan); o Case U-17319 (DTE Electric 2014 PSCR Plan); o Case U-17674 (WEPCO 2015 PSCR Plan); o Case U-17679 (Indiana-Michigan 2015 PSCR Plan); o Case U-17689 (DTE Electric Cost of Service and Rate Design); o Case U-17688 (Consumers Energy Cost of Service and Rate Design); o Case U-17698 (Indiana-Michigan Cost of Service and Rate Design); o Case U-17762 (DTE Electric Energy Optimization Plan); o Case U-17752 (Consumers Energy Community Solar); o Case U-17735 (Consumers Energy General Rates); o Case U-17767 (DTE General Rates); o Case U-17792 (Consumers Energy Renewable Energy Plan Revision); o Case U-17895 (UPPCO General Rates); o Case U-17911 (UPPCO 2016 PSCR Plan); o Case U-17990 (Consumers Energy General Rates); and o Case U-18014 (DTE General Rates); o Case U-17611-R (UPPCO 2015 PSCR Reconciliation); o Case U-18089 (Alpena Power PURPA Avoided Costs); o Case U-18090 (Consumers Energy PURPA Avoided Costs); o Case U-18091 (DTE PURPA Avoided Costs); o Case U-18092 (Indiana Michigan Electric Power PURPA Avoided Costs); o Case U-18093 (Northern States Power PURPA Avoided Costs); o Case U-18094 (Upper Peninsula Power Company PURPA Avoided Costs); o Case U-18095 (UMERC PURPA Avoided Costs); o Case U-18224 (UMERC Certificate of Necessity); o Case U-18255 (DTE General Rate Case); o Case U-18322 (Consumers Energy General Rate Case).

Expert witness before the Public Utilities Commission of Nevada in o Case 16-07001 (NV Energy 2017-2036 Sierra Pacific Integrated Resource Plan)

Expert witness before the Missouri Public Service Commission in o Case ER-2016-0179 (Ameren Missouri General Rate Case) o Case ER-2016-0285 (KCP&L General Rate Case) o Case ET-2016-0246 (Ameren Missouri EV Policy)

Expert witness before the Kentucky Public Service Commission o Case 2016-00370 (Kentucky Utilities General Rate Case)

Expert witness before the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities in o Case 17-05 (Eversource General Rate Case) o Case 17-13 (National Grid General Rate Case)

Coauthored “Charge without a Cause: Assessing Utility Demand Charges on Small Customers”

Currently under contract to the Michigan Agency for Energy to develop a Roadmap for CHP Market Development in Michigan, including evaluation of various CHP technologies and applications using STEER Michigan as an integrated resource planning tool.

Under contract to NextEnergy, authored “Alternative Energy and Distributed Generation” chapter of Smart Grid Economic Development Opportunities report to Michigan Economic Development Corporation and assisted authors of chapters on “Demand Response” and “Automated Energy Management Systems”.

Developed presentation on “Whole System Perspective on Energy Optimization Strategy” for Michigan Energy Optimization Collaborative.

Under contract to NextEnergy, assisted in development of industrial energy efficiency technology development strategy.


Page 7 of 9


Under contract to a multinational solar photovoltaics company, developed market strategy recommendations.

For an automobile OEM, developed analyses of economic benefits of demand response in vehicle charging and vehicle-to-grid electricity storage solutions.

Under contract to Pew Charitable Trusts, assisted in development of a report of best practices for electric vehicle charging infrastructure.

Under contract to a national foundation, developed renewable energy business case for Michigan including estimates of rate impacts, employment and income effects, health effects, and greenhouse gas emissions effects.

Assisted in Michigan market development for a solar panel manufacturer, clean energy finance company, and industrial energy management systems company.

Under contract to Institute for Energy Innovation, organized legislative learning sessions covering a synopsis of Michigan’s energy uses and supply, energy efficiency, and economic impacts of clean energy.

For Department of Energy Labor and Economic Growth Participant in the Michigan Public Service Commission Energy Optimization Collaborative, a

regular meeting and action collaborative of parties involved in the Energy Optimization programs required of utilities by Michigan law enacted in 2008.

Lead development of a social-media-based community for energy practitioners in Michigan at www.MichEEN.org.

Drafted analysis and policy paper concerning customer and third-party access to utility meter data.

Analyzed hourly electric utility load demonstrating relationship amongst time of day, daylight, and temperature on loads of residential, commercial, industrial, and public lighting customers. Analysis demonstrated the importance of heating for residential electrical loads and the effects of various energy efficiency measures on load-duration curves.

Analyzed relationship of marginal locational prices to load, demonstrating that traditional assumptions of Integrated Resource Planning are invalid and that there are substantial current opportunities for cost-effective grid-integrated storage for the purpose of price arbitrage as opposed to traditionally considered load arbitrage.

Developed analyses and recommendations concerning the use of feed-in tariffs in Michigan. Participated in Pluggable Electric Vehicle Task Force and initiated changes in State building

code to accommodate installation of vehicle charging equipment. Organized December 2010 conference on Biomass Waste to Energy technologies and

market opportunities. Participated in and provided support for teams working on developing Michigan businesses

involved in renewable energy, storage, and smart grid supply chains. Developed analyses and recommendations concerning low-income energy assistance

coordination with low-income energy efficiency programs and utility payment collection programs.

Drafted State of Michigan response to a US Department of Energy request for information on offshore wind energy technology development opportunities.

Assisted in development of draft performance contracting enabling legislation, since adopted by the State of Michigan.

For Verizon Business Analyzed several potential new lines of business for potential entry by Verizon’s Global

Services Systems Integration business unit and recommended entry to the “Smart Grid” market. This recommendation was adopted and became a major corporate initiative.

Provided market analysis and participation in various conferences to aid in positioning Verizon in the “Smart Grid” market. Recommendations are proprietary to Verizon.


Page 8 of 9

http://www.micheen.org/


Led a task force to identify potential converged solutions for the “Smart Grid” market by integrating Verizon’s current products and selected partners. Established five key partnerships that are the basis for Verizon’s current “Smart Grid” product offerings.

Participated in the “Smart Grid” architecture team sponsored by the corporate Chief Technology Officer with sub-team lead responsibilities in the areas of Software and System Integration and Network and Systems Management. This team established a reference architecture for the company’s “Smart Grid” offerings, identified necessary changes in networks and product offerings, and recommended public policy positions concerning spectrum allocation by the FCC, security standards being developed by the North American Reliability Council, and interoperability standards being developed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology.

Developed product proposals and requirements in the areas of residential energy management, commercial building energy management, advanced metering infrastructure, power distribution monitoring and control, power outage detection and restoration, energy market integration and trading platforms, utility customer portals and notification services, utility contact center voice application enablement, and critical infrastructure physical security.

Lead solution architecture and proposal development for six utilities with solutions encompassing customer portal, advanced metering, outage management, security assessment, distribution automation, and comprehensive “Smart Grid” implementation.

Presented Verizon’s “Smart Grid” capabilities to seventeen utilities. Presented “Role of Telecommunications Carriers in Smart Grid Implementation” to 2009 Mid-

America Regulatory Conference. Presented “Smart Grid: Transforming the Electricity Supply Chain” to the 2009 World Energy

Engineering Conference. Participant in NASPInet work groups of the North American Energy Reliability Corporation

(NERC), developing specifications for a wide-area situational awareness network to facilitate the sharing and analysis of synchrophasor data amongst utilities in order to increase transmission reliability.

Provided technical advice to account team concerning successful proposal to provide network services and information systems support for the California ISO, which coordinates power dispatch and intercompany power sales transactions for the California market.

For Michigan Department of Natural Resources Determined permit requirements under Section 316 of the Clean Water Act for all steam

electric plants currently operating in the State of Michigan. Case manager and key witness for the State of Michigan in FERC, State court, and Federal

court cases concerning economics and environmental impacts of the Ludington Pumped Storage Plant, which is the world’s largest pumped storage plant. A lead negotiator for the State in the ultimate settlement of this issue. The settlement was valued at $127 million in 1995 and included considerations of environmental mitigation, changes in power system dispatch rules, and damages compensation.

Managed FERC license application reviews for the State of Michigan for all hydroelectric projects in Michigan as these came up for reissuance in 1970s and 1980s.

Testified on behalf of the State of Michigan in contested cases before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission concerning benefit-cost analyses and regulatory issues for four different hydroelectric dams in Michigan.

Reviewed (as regulator) the environmental impacts and benefit-cost analyses of all major steam electric and most hydroelectric plants in the State of Michigan.

Executive responsibility for development, maintenance, and operations of the State of Michigan’s information system for mineral (includes oil and gas) rights leasing, unitization and apportionment, and royalty collection.

In cooperative project with Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, participated in development of a simulation model of oil field development logistics and environmental impact on Canada’s Arctic slope for Tesoro Oil.


Page 9 of 9

U20697-MEIBC-CE-854 Page 1 of 1

Question:

The following questions are all with respect to Exhibit A-21 (JCA-7):

9. For each of the customers represented on slides 4 and 5, identify the scope of distribution facilitiesthat are dedicated to the GS-2 customer. For example, the Company might identify that for a given customer, the transmission to distribution substation is shared and the primary circuit is shared, but the lateral to the customer and the transformers to serve the customer are dedicated but for another customer, the substation and remaining distribution facilities are dedicated.

Response:

The requested information is provided in Attachment 1 to this discovery response.

___________________________ RICHARD T. BLUMENSTOCK May 20, 2020

Electric Planning


Page 1

20697-MEIBC-CE-854Attachment 1

Identifier Dedicated Distribution Facilities

1 0.7 miles of 46 kV line, Metering, Telemetry/Communcation, Protective Relaying 2 Metering, Telemetry/Communication3 None

4Crossarm w/ fuses, Overhead PT/CT metering cluster, Underground primary cable to customer switch

5 Metering, Telemetry/Communcation 6 Metering, Telemetry/Communcation 7 0.59 miles of 46 kV line, Metering, Telemetry/Communication8 2.12 miles of 46 kV line, 46 kV line exit and breaker, Metering, Telemetry/Communication.9 Metering

100.24 miles of 46 kV line, dedicated substation including 12/16/20 MVA 46/13.8 kV LTC transformer, 46 kV switch and fuses, 13.8 kV switches, fuses and station power. Metering equipment.

11 Metering

12

4 miles of 138 kV underground circuits, dedicated 138 kV riser station including switches, dedicated substation including two 50/67/83 MVA 138:13.8kV LTC transformers, 138 kV switches and circuit switchers, 13.8 kV breakers, switches, station power, metering, relays, power quality monitors.

13 Metering14 0.05 miles of 46 kV line, Metering, Telemetry/Communcation, Protective Relaying

15

0.7 miles of 46 kV line, dedicated substation including 12/16/20 MVA 46:24.9 kV transformer, 46 kV switch and fuses, 24.9 kV switches, voltage regulators and station power transformers, metering and power quality monitors.


Page 2


Question:

3. For Category 3 (methane digesters 150kW – 550kW) of the current distributed generationprogram, please determine the following values. Please include all calculations to determinethese values.

a. Total kW available for Category 3 under the program (given soft cap of 0.25% of average in‐state peak load).

b. Current amount of installed/operational kW in Category 3.c. Remaining amount of kW available for installation under Category 3 program based on total

installed/operational kW (given total kW available as determined in a. and current amountof kW installed/operational in b.).

d. Remaining percentage available in the Category 3 program currently based oninstalled/operational distributed generation systems.

e. Current amount of kW of pending applications for Category 3.f. Total current amount of installed/operational kW in Category 3 plus current amount of kW

of pending applications for Category 3.g. Remaining amount of kW that would be available for installation under Category 3 program

given all installed/operational systems and assuming all pending applications werecompleted and operational.

h. Remaining percentage available in the Category 3 program given all installed/operationalsystems and assuming all pending applications were completed and operational.

i. For each of the months April 2019 through March 2020, the number of applications underCategory 3 program and the number of kW requested in such applications.

Response:

a. The applicable Category 3 cap of the program can be calculated as 0.25% of the Consumers Energyaverage peak load for the preceding 5‐year period. This calculation results in a current program capof 18,203 kW.

b. The total installed capacity of active Category 3 program participants is 190 kW.

c. The remaining program capacity available for Category 3 systems can be calculated as the differencebetween the cap in part a. to this response (18,203 kW) and the amount of Category 3 installedcapacity active in the program (190 kW). This calculation results in remaining Category 3 programcapacity of 18,013 kW.

d. The remaining Category 3 program capacity can be calculated as the Category 3 program capacityavailable (18,013 kW) divided by the total Category 3 program cap (18,203 kW). This calculationresults in remaining Category 3 program capacity of approximately 98.96%.

e. The Company has no pending applications for the Category 3 program.

MPSC Case No. U-20697 Exhibit EIB-10

Page 1 of 3


f. The total installed Category 3 program capacity (190 kW) plus the pending or incomplete Category 3applications (0 kW) is 190 kW.

g. The total Category 3 program cap (18,203 kW) minus the sum of (i) the total installed Category 3program capacity and (ii) the pending or incomplete Category 3 applications (190 kW) is 18,013 kW.

h. The remaining Category 3 program capacity calculated in part g. (18,013 kW) divided by the totalprogram cap (18,203 kW) is approximately 98.96%.

i. There were no additional Category 3 applications submitted to the Company during this time.

___________________________ KEITH G. TROYER

April 14, 2020



Page 2 of 3


Question:

4. Explain which of your responses to questions 1‐3 present kW capacity for alternating current

capacity at the point of interconnection and which use some other measurement of capacity.

Response:

The capacity provided for Category 1 and Category 2 in discovery responses MEIBC‐CE‐198 and MEIBC‐

CE‐199 respectively, is determined based upon the direct current system size. The capacity provided for

Category 3 in discovery response MEIBC‐CE‐200 is determined based upon the alternating current

system size.

___________________________ KEITH G. TROYER

April 14, 2020



Page 3 of 3


Question:

1. Given that the current Covid‐19 pandemic and Governor Whitmer’s stay‐at‐home orders, including

Executive Order 2020‐59, issued on April 24, 2020, have significantly restricted Distributed Generation

(“DG”) system installations for the last 6 weeks, does Consumers Energy plan to grant an extension for

customers to submit applications and qualify for net metering?

a. If so, for how long after the end of this current rate case does the Company plan to allow customers

to submit applications for the net metering program?

Response:

No. Consumers Energy believes the proposed DG tariff effective date of January 1, 2020 will provide

ample time for customers to submit applications prior to the implementation the DG program after the

stay‐at‐home order is lifted.

___________________________ KEITH G. TROYER

May 8, 2020


MPSC Case No. U-20697Exhibit EIB-11

Page 1 of 1


Question:

1. Provide hourly outflow in 2018 from aggregated customers having behind-the-meter generation ineach cost of service class in the form of an Excel spreadsheet.

Response:

Objection of Counsel: Consumers Energy Company objects to this discovery request for the reason that the request calls for the creation of documents not in existence. Subject to this objection, and without waiving it, Consumers Energy Company answers as follows:

The Company does not have an aggregated outflow profile for customers having behind-the-meter generation. However, in response to U20697-MEIBC-CE-849, the Company is providing the 2018 outflow meter data available for customers participating in the Company’s net metering program.

___________________________ JOSNELLY C APONTE May 19, 2020

Rates & Regulation


Page 1 of 11


Question:

2. For each cost of service class, provide the annual amount of bill credits and the amount of paymentsto customers, if any, in relation to energy outflow from customers in that cost of service class, in the form of an Excel spreadsheet.

Response:

Objection of Counsel: Consumers Energy Company objects to this discovery request for the reason that it calls for the creation of documents not in existence. Subject to this objection, and without waiving it, Consumers Energy Company answers as follows:

The Company currently uses a manual process in which trained billing agents identify the amount of Net Excess Generation credits each month and amend each net metering customer’s monthly electric bill by applying the eligible Net Excess Generation credit amount. While customer specific Net Excess Generation credits are maintained by a billing agent, the Net Excess Generation credits are currently not stored in the Company’s billing or accounting system. This means that (1) the Company does not have the bill credits provided to net metering customers in a readily accessible report today and (2) the Company is currently not recovering these excess energy credits through rates today. The Company is, however, in the early phase of developing an automated process for tracking and reporting outflow credits for its proposed Distributed Generation program to avoid both issues in the future.

___________________________ Rachel L. Barnes May 19, 2020

Rates & Regulation


Page 2 of 11


Question:

3. In preparing the cost of service study in this case, are bill credits for outflow from customers treatedas negative revenue, such that the rate revenue from the class is reduced by the amount of these bill credits? If not, are they recorded as expenses? In either case, explain in detail how these bill credits flow through the cost of service study and affect required revenue by class, including identification of line items in the cost of service study in which these bill credits are included and which allocators are applied to assign cost of service class responsibility.

Response:

As indicated in the response to question U20697-MEIBC-CE-847, the Company does not currently recover the excess energy credits applied to customers in the net metering program today. As such, the credits applied to net metering customers for excess energy are not included in the cost of service study in this case.


Rates & Regulation


Page 3 of 11


Question:

4. For each customer known by Consumers Energy to have behind-the-meter solar as of January 1, 2018,provide hourly inflow and outflow for that customer during 2018, without identifying the customer but identifying the customer’s rate class. Assign a number to each customer such that reference can be made to a particular customer for any follow-up requests. Provide this information in the form of an Excel spreadsheet.

Response:

The 2018 meter data available for customers participating in the Company’s net metering program is provided as an attachment to this response. The data for residential customers is captured in separate files from commercial & industrial customers.

· Inflow is in files labeled as “delivered” (power delivered to customer, ignoring anyreceived power)

· Outflow is in files labeled as “received” (power received from customer, ignoring anydelivered power)

The data attributes within the files are the following:

· Unit of Measure: KWh· Time stamp: EST· Hour ending intervals. When the files say 1/1/2018 INT01, this means that the data

represents the kWh used between 1/1/2018 00:00:00 and 1/1/2018 00:59:59 and so on.· Intervals are not cumulative. If an interval is missing, the energy is not captured in the

following period.· The identifier is a unique 9-letter code that’s consistent for each customer across files.

This code can be used to reference a particular customer in any follow up request.


Rates & Regulation


Page 4 of 11


Question:


5. In Excel format, provide all data given to The Brattle Group for Exhibit A-21 (JCA-7)Analysis of Consumers’ Standby Customers including, but not limited, to: a. GSG-2 Contract accounts with Industry+Contracted capacity_2018.xlsxb. GSG2_contractdemand.xlsxc. GSG-2 (Stand by) Interval Data.xlsxd. GSG-2 (Stand by) Interval Data_2015.xlsxe. U-20134 COSS Settlement_Unofficial.xlsxf. U-20134 COSS Settlement_Unofficial_2018 Load Profile.xlsxg. Standby Analysis_GSG-2_U-20134_hwm.xlsx

Response:

a through g. Attached are the files provided to Brattle in support of Exhibit A-21 (JCA-7). Please note that for part b the name of the file is "2015-17 Standby Customer List".

The meter data used for the development of Exhibit A-21 (JCA-7) is being provided after the Company manually replaced the contract account information for each customer with a simple numerical sequence. This numerical sequence was maintained across the data sets so that they could still be connected for an analysis.


Rates & Regulation


Page 5 of 11


Question:


6. For each of the customers represented on slides 4 and 5, provide the rate schedule the customerwould be assigned if they were not using CHP,

Response:

If a customer has no self-generation, they could choose any rate schedule in accordance with the tariffs. Current GSG-2 accounts are served at voltage level 3 or above, so they would qualify for one of our primary rate options. With the exception of EIP, they could choose to take firm service under any of the primary options (GP, GPTU, or GPD) today. However, according to Tariff Rule C4.2, Choice of Rates, "The selection of the rate or provision of a rate is the responsibility of the customer."


Rates & Regulation


Page 6 of 11


Question:


7. For each of the customers represented on slides 4 and 5, provide the 2018 8760 load profile. If any ofthese customers provide power to the grid, provide both hourly inflow and hourly outflow for each of those customers.

Response:

Please see response to request U20697-MEIBC-CE-847, part c


Rates & Regulation


Page 7 of 11


Question:


8. Reference slide 13, item 2, which begins “A key engineering consideration….” Please explain whydiversity of demand amongst standby customers is important in planning Consumers distribution system, rather than the diversity of demand amongst customers using the same distribution system facilities as the standby customer.

Response:

Diversity of demand among customers, standby or otherwise, is important in planning the Company’s distribution system because customers do not all require their energy to be delivered at the same time. Historical system peak loads and circuit peak loads, which are used in the Company’s planning studies, inherently include the diversity of customers. Reference to “holding constant all other classes of demand” in the cited portion of Exhibit A-21 (JCA-7) includes holding constant the inherent diversity of customer demand.

___________________________ RICHARD T. BLUMENSTOCK May 20, 2020

Electric Planning


Page 8 of 11


Question:


10. Provide the load data and calculations as a spreadsheet with formulae intact for the preparation ofthe tables on slides 17 and 18.

Response:

Please see file attached.


Rates & Regulation


Page 9 of 11


Question:


11. Explain in detail how customer contract demand is determined for customers in class GSG-2,identifying the roles of the utility and the customer and the calculations made.

Response:

Objection of Counsel: Consumers Energy Company objects to this discovery request for the reason that the request is unclear, vague, and ambiguous. Subject to this objection, and without waiving it, Consumers Energy Company answers as follows:

It is unclear what is meant by “customer contract demand” in this discovery question. The Company assumes that “customer contract demand” is referring to Standby Capacity. Using that assumption, Standby Capacity is defined on the Company’s Tariff Sheet No. D-81.00 as the contracted kW capacity that the Company is expected to provide to the customer on an occasional basis due to outages of the customer’s generating unit(s).

The customer and a representative of the Company discuss the specifications of the generator to determine a mutually agreed upon conservative Standby Capacity amount. The customer confirms the amount of Standby Capacity desired by completing Consumers Energy’s Form 1812, Contract for General Service Secondary Self Generation GSG-2 (Primary Service).

___________________________ Rachel L. Barnes May 19, 2020

Rates and Regulation

MPSC Case No. U-20697Exhibit EIB-12Page 10 of 11


Question:


12. Confirm that on slides 5 and 18, CP for each customer refers to the customers demand at the time ofthe GSG-2 class demand peak and not at the time of Consumers Energy’s system peak.

Response:

On slides 5 and 18, CP indeed represents the coincident demand of all customers at the time of the Company's system peak


Rates & Regulation

MPSC Case No. U-20697Exhibit EIB-12Page 11 of 11


Question:

1. Refer to testimony of Sarah Nielsen, page 25 lines 18‐19. Please explain the process by which electric

vehicle (“EV”) charging equipment will be placed on the “Company approved list,” including:

a. Whether the list will be open to additions (and deletions) at any time or will be developed during a

fixed time period;

b. The criteria that will be applied to determine whether specific equipment will be “listed”

c. The process by which specific equipment will be evaluated to be “listed.”

d. Will equipment identified on the “Company‐approved list” include specification of any bundled

software?

e. In order to promote a competitive marketplace in EVSE and services, will Consumers Energy require

that equipment on the “Company‐approved list” be third‐party certified as compliant with the Open

Charge Point Protocol?

Response:

a. After the initial list is developed, there will be an opportunity for additions (and deletions) to this list.

b. The EVSE must be able to share charging data, provide for demand response capabilities, and meetour cyber security standards. Given the potentially more unique fleet vehicle charging EVSE, however, we will maintain flexibility for add on devices and methodologies to provide these capabilities if the EVSE itself is not fully capable of data logging or demand response. We are also likely to give preference to devices with high reliability, such as cellular network capabilities, and vendors that have an established installation network in our service territory to ensure timely and quality customer service.

c. The Company anticipates developing the initial Company‐approved list of EV chargers in early 2021through a request for qualifications process assuming Program approval in December 2020.

d. No, the Company does not anticipate equipment on the Company‐approved list will includespecification of any bundled software. The Company anticipates utilizing a variety of software programs, but is also open to exploring software that could consolidate information coming from various sources such as EV charging networks.


Page 1 of 9


e. Similar to PowerMIDrive, we anticipate that Open Charge Point Protocol (OCCP) will be preferred tofacilitate data collection. Third‐party certification may be a bonus to help differentiate an EVSE respondent, but we do not anticipate third‐party certification as a requirement.

___________________________ Sarah R. Nielsen

May 27, 2020

Demand Side Management


Page 2 of 9


Question:

2. Refer to the testimony of Sarah Nielsen, page 25 lines 22‐24.

a. What technical standards will Consumers Energy use to implement demand response features in EV

charging?

b. Will demand response be a function of the electric vehicle supply equipment (“EVSE”) or of the

vehicle?

Response:

a. While Consumers Energy is requiring EVSE to have demand response capabilities, the Company hasnot determined technical standards for such capabilities at this time. The plan is to be open to and test technical standards to determine the best approach or approaches. The Company will focus on finding open technical protocols and standards to ensure a wide range of functionality and interoperability in the DR capability.

b. To best prepare for the future, it is prudent to be open to both approaches even though the EVSE ispresently the preferred route given existing technology and services.

___________________________ Sarah R. Nielsen

May 27, 2020



Page 3 of 9


Question:

3. Refer to testimony of Sarah Nielsen, page 28 lines 21‐22. Consumers Energy proposes to require that

each DCFC site have at least 125 kW charging throughput. What is the basis for this specific

requirement? What equipment does Consumers Energy anticipate will meet this requirement?

Response:

The Company is requiring 125 kW EV charging capacity for each DCFC rebate to ensure futureproofing and for consistency with our prior rate case proceedings and stakeholder input from PowerMIDrive. While many vehicles on the market today cannot charge at a full 125 kW, EV charging capacity is expected to grow in the future and it will be larger faster in the medium and heavy‐duty vehicle segments that PowerMIFleet includes. Specialized fleet vehicles are also likely to have greater charging requirements and capacity than consumer vehicles on the mass market today. Additionally, the December 2018 report from Michigan State University’s Electric Vehicle Charger Placement Optimization Project that was commissioned and funded by the Michigan Energy Office found that preparing for a higher charging capability than today’s most common 50 kW was a lesser cost scenario. The Company expects that there will be cases where multiple DCFCs will be combined to meet and/or exceed the 125 kW requirement, but even in PowerMIDrive we are already seeing cases where individual DCFCs are proposed to exceed the 125 kW requirement. Thus, maintaining the 125 kW requirement is prudent.

___________________________ Sarah R. Nielsen

May 27, 2020



Page 4 of 9


Question:

4. Please explain the capability that Consumers Energy proposes to develop using the technical

development funding as described in the testimony of Sarah Nielsen, page 33 line 17 through page 34

line 6. The current description explains that data from various sources will be integrated but does not

explain the resulting use cases.

Response:

Using the technical development funding, the Company proposes developing capabilities to collect,

consolidate, and analyze charging data as well as communicate and analyze demand response events.

The Company anticipates that data from various sources such as EVSE networks, EV manufacturers, and

fleet management companies will need to be integrated to execute these activities.

___________________________ Sarah R. Nielsen

May 27, 2020



Page 5 of 9


Question:

5. Many commercial fleets currently use a “fleet management” information technology provider. How

does Consumers Energy anticipate the future relationship between Consumers Energy’s fleet charging

information systems and those fleet management service providers?

Response:

How Consumers Energy’s fleet charging information systems and those of fleet management service providers will work together is one thing the Company expects to explore and learn from PowerMIFleet. Consumers Energy intent is that the systems will work together and complement each other. While fleet management service providers optimize for logistical and operational efficiencies, Consumers Energy plans to optimize for the benefit of the grid, affordability for all customers, and the needs of individual fleet customers. Thus, the union of the customer operations and grid benefit goals must be explored.

___________________________ Sarah R. Nielsen

May 27, 2020



Page 6 of 9


Question:

6. How does Consumers Energy propose to develop the details of its concierge service? In particular,

please explain what role Consumers Energy foresees for stakeholders including EVSE providers?

Response:

As stated on pages 32 and 33 of Witness Nielsen’s testimony, “The Company proposes introducing a fleet electrification concierge service to help customers explore and develop a fleet electrification strategy. This service would require a close partnership with individual customers and may include:

Analyzing fleet operations to determine electrification plan;

Identifying electrification use cases that are economic;

Analyzing vehicle usage needs to determine charging needs;

Incorporating employee workplace charging considerations into EVSE needs;

Recommending EVSE locations and facilitate installation;

Analyzing electric rate options and determining optimal charging profile and rate; and/or

Connecting customers to electric vehicle and EVSE providers.

The activities above will be completed by a combination of internal Company resources and third parties. We expect that the concierge service will be agnostic to all EVSE on our approved list. The only exception that we anticipate to this agnostic intent is for specialized EVSE for a particular EV that the manufacturer mandates.

___________________________ Sarah R. Nielsen

May 27, 2020



Page 7 of 9


Question:

7. Reference testimony of Sarah Nielsen page 36 line 3 through page 37 line 25. Explain the degree of

flexibility that Consumers Energy proposes in the level of spending in program components and in

rebate levels by type of charging experience, and how Consumers Energy intends to engage

stakeholders in making program adjustments.

Response:

With PowerMIDrive, prior to going to the MPSC for changes within the total budget, we considered input from stakeholders and their experiences with the program, and we plan to adopt the same approach with any future spending flexibility for PowerMIFleet. Due to the nature of this pilot program, participation may vary significantly from initial expectations, which could result in underspending in one area or spending funds allocated in another area faster than anticipated. Any Program adjustments beyond the $12.2 million estimated Program costs, including increases above approved rebate levels, will be addressed with the MPSC and other stakeholders in an amended or separate rate case proceeding.

___________________________ Sarah R. Nielsen

May 27, 2020



Page 8 of 9


Question:

8. How does Consumers Energy expect the COVID‐19 epidemic and consequent recession will affect the

PowerMIFleet program? In particular, might larger rebates be needed to accomplish the program’s

learning objectives in these circumstances?

Response:

WoodMackenzie is currently projecting “that global EV sales for 2020 will drop 43% year‐on‐year, from 2.2 million in 2019 down to 1.3 million.” A slowdown in EV adoption could result in lower Program participation. The Program is proposed for a three‐year period which allows for time to learn from participation at currently proposed rebate levels as well as make program adjustments as the Company learns more. This could include Program modifications such as changing rebate levels or extending the length of the Program to adjust to new EV adoption levels.

___________________________ Sarah R. Nielsen

May 27, 2020



Page 9 of 9


Question:

1. Reference Sarah R. Nielsen Direct Testimony, pp. 43‐44 (lines 20‐23, p. 43; lines 1‐4, p. 44). Since the

filing of Witness Nielsen’s Direct Testimony on February 27, 2020, when does the Company project that

it will exhaust available funds for each segment of the PowerMIDrive Program?

Response:

Objection by Counsel: Consumers Energy Company objects to this

discovery request because it is irrelevant to this case. The testimony

referenced only reports out PowerMIDrive spend for 2019 and this

discovery request requires speculation and assumptions on the part of

the Company to respond to this discovery request that would not be

appropriate. Notwithstanding this objection and without waiving it,

the Company responds as follows.

As discussed in Case No. U‐20134, the PowerMIDrive program is a three‐year pilot program and the

Company intends to use the funds approved during that time period, as approved by the Commission.

Because the PowerMIDrive program received regulatory asset treatment, the Company will continue to

report out spend in future rate cases. Further, while the Company intends to exhaust the funds awarded

to maximize learning from the pilot program within the 3‐year pilot program time period, with the

advent of COVID‐19 and the impacts associated with the pandemic, it is unclear at this time what

impacts the pandemic will have on the program – this includes forecasted times for exhaustion of funds.

___________________________ Sarah R. Nielsen

July 17, 2020



Page 1 of 2


Question:

2. Please clarify which of those funds are “committed” and “spent” for each segment of the

PowerMIDrive Program, as opposed to those funds that may be “available” to each segment of the

PowerMIDrive Program.

Response:

See response to U20697‐MEIBC‐CE‐1398.

___________________________ Sarah R. Nielsen

July 17, 2020



Page 2 of 2

MPSC Case No. U-20697 Michigan EIBC's and IEI's Responses to CE Second Set of Discovery Requests

20697-CE-MEIBC-4: Please confirm that in the May 2, 2019 Order in Case No. U-20162 (“May 2 Order”), the Commission found the inflow-outflow method approved in DTE’s electric case “…ensures customers pay equitable COS as set forth in MCL 460.6a(14), including both distribution and transmission charges, as contemplated by MCL 460.1177(4)(b).” See May 2 Order, page 181. If not confirming, please explain why?

Response:

The Commission’s May 2, 2019 Order speaks for itself.

Response provided by: Dr. Laura S. Sherman


Page 1 of 7


20697-CE-MEIBC-5: Does MEIBC agree that the Commission found it reasonable to limit the application of outflow credits to the power supply component of a customer’s bill in Case No. U-20162. If not agreeing, please explain why and provide all sources indicating otherwise.

Response:

The Commission’s Order speaks for itself. The Commission Order in Case No. U-20162 limited outflow credits to the power supply component of a customer’s bill. However, as I noted in my testimony, “The Commission subsequently decided in the case of UPPCO (Case No. 20276) and Indiana Michigan’s DG tariffs (Case No. 20359) that the full power supply component of the retail rate represented the equitable cost-of-service based value for outflow from solar DG systems.” (Sherman Direct,1 pg. 22)


1 Direct Testimony of Dr. Laura S. Sherman, on behalf of the Michigan Energy Innovation Business Council and Institute for Energy Innovation, MPSC Case No. U-20697, dated June 24, 2020 (“Sherman Direct”).


Page 2 of 7


20697-CE-MEIBC-6: Is Dr. Sherman aware of any other state legislatures, commissions, or utilities that have implemented demand charges, system access charges, or higher monthly customer charges for customers with distributed generation instead of a program cap? If the answer is yes, please specify the amount of other state legislatures, commissions, or utilities, known to Dr. Sherman, that have implemented demand charges, system access charges, or higher monthly customer charges for customers with distributed generation instead of a program cap.

Response:

Objection by Counsel: Michigan EIBC objects to this discovery request to the extent the request seeks the results of an analysis that Michigan EIBC has not performed and is not required to perform. There is no obligation to perform tasks or generate information on behalf of a requesting party in the manner proposed. Michigan EIBC also objects to this discovery request as written. Subject to and without waiving this objection, Michigan EIBC responds as follows:

It is unclear what the Company means by “higher monthly customer charges for customers with distributed generation instead of a program cap.” This would depend upon the point of reference and comparison. In addition, even if I had performed such a survey or analysis, it would be impossible to determine, without having been involved in each process, whether such rate structures were established specifically “instead of a program cap.”



Page 3 of 7


20697-CE-MEIBC-7: Is Dr. Sherman aware of any other state legislatures, commissions, or utilities that have implemented demand charges, system access charges, or higher monthly customer charges for residential customers with distributed generation? If the answer is yes, please specify which other state legislatures, commissions, or utilities, known to Dr. Sherman, that have implemented demand, system access charges, or higher monthly customer charges.

Response:

Objection by Counsel: Michigan EIBC objects to this discovery request to the extent the request seeks the results of an analysis that Michigan EIBC has not performed and is not required to perform. There is no obligation to perform tasks or generate information on behalf of a requesting party in the manner proposed. Michigan EIBC also objects to this discovery request as written. Subject to and without waiving this objection, Michigan EIBC responds as follows:

It is unclear what the Company means by “higher monthly customer charges for residential customers.” This would depend upon the point of reference and comparison. In addition, even if I had performed such a survey or analysis, it would be impossible to determine, without having been involved in each process, whether such rate structures were “higher” for residential customers with distributed generation.



Page 4 of 7


20697-CE-MEIBC-8: Is Dr. Sherman aware of any voltage or distribution grid issues from intermittent distributed generation in other states? If the answer is yes, please specify the states, known to Dr. Sherman, with voltage or distribution grid issues from intermittent distributed generation.

Response:

Objection by Counsel: Michigan EIBC objects to this discovery request to the extent the request seeks the results of an analysis that Michigan EIBC has not performed and is not required to perform. There is no obligation to perform tasks or generate information on behalf of a requesting party in the manner proposed. Michigan EIBC also objects to this discovery request as written. Subject to this objection, and without waiving it, Michigan EIBC responds as follows:

I have not performed any analysis or study that would be responsive to the Company’s question. Moreover, the terms and application of “voltage or distribution grid issues” from intermittent distributed generation, as presented in the question, is overly broad and could emanate from numerous sources not within the distributed generation owner’s control. Michigan EIBC Witness Douglas Jester did offer direct testimony in this proceeding and is familiar with various areas regarding electric system voltage. His response is detailed, below.


In most states, any voltage or distribution issues that occur in relation to intermittent distributed generation are likely to be highly localized and addressed through interconnection procedures. Widespread issues that would attract attention or require changes in policy will only occur at high penetration. Hawaii, with 2019 penetration of 11.84% and California with 2019 penetration of 6.13% are the only jurisdictions in which I am aware that specific policies have been developed to deal with high penetration by intermittent distributed generation, though both continue to enable and encourage further development of distributed solar generation. The other 35 states in which intermittent distributed generation penetration exceeds Michigan’s 0.11% do not appear to have identified issues warranting significant policy or procedural responses.

See attached (pdf and excel version): solar penetration, which is the ratio of the EIA solar generation data to the electricity sales data, by State: https://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/browser/#/topic/5?agg=1,0&geo=g0fvvvvvvvvvo&endsec=g&freq=A&start=2018&end=2019&ctype=linechart&ltype=pin&rtype=s&maptype=0&rse=0&pin=.

Response provided by: Douglas Jester


Page 5 of 7

https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/V87qCBB173UPG7BqSz2On_?domain=eia.gov




20697-CE-MEIBC-9: Please confirm that the DG program is mutually exclusive from the interconnection process and that reaching the DG program cap does not deny a customer from interconnecting. If not confirming, please explain how reaching the cap would deny customers from interconnecting.

Response:

Objection by Counsel: Michigan EIBC objects to this discovery request to the extent the request seeks the results of an analysis that Michigan EIBC has not performed and is not required to perform. There is no obligation to perform tasks or generate information on behalf of a requesting party in the manner proposed. Michigan EIBC also objects to this discovery request as written. Subject to this objection, and without waiving it, Michigan EIBC responds as follows:

It is unclear what the Company means by “mutually exclusive from.” Nevertheless, as explained in my Direct Testimony, “As detailed in a legal memo written by Varnum LLP (Exhibit EIB-6 (LSS- 6)), ‘Our analysis found that there are no state statutes in Michigan which specifically require investor-owned utilities to interconnect residential and small commercial solar systems (<100 kW) to the utility grid once the distributed generation cap for that utility is reached. Interconnection of these systems may be required under federal law (i.e., PURPA), but this has not yet been legally tested in Michigan, as no [Commission] complaint case has been brought by a customer denied interconnection (e.g., in UPPCO’s territory after the initial residential solar cap was reached in 2016).’”



Page 6 of 7

Net generation for all sectors

https://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/browser/#/topic/0?agg=2,1,0&fuel=0002&geo=g0fvvvvvvvvvo&sec=g&freq=A&start=2018&end=2019&ctype=linechart&ltype=pin&rtype=s&maptype=0&rse=0&pin=

Wed Jul 01 2020 15:25:43 GMT-0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)

Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration

description units source key 2018 2019 2018 2019 Small Solar %

Net generation for all sectors thousand megawatthours

All solar ELEC.GEN.TSN-US-99.A

Small-scale solar photovoltaic thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-US-99.A

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : United States thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-US-99.A 29539 35041 ELEC.SALES.US-ALL.A 3859185 3749538 0.93%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Hawaii thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-HI-99.A 1029 1112 ELEC.SALES.HI-ALL.A 9337 9390 11.84%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : California thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-CA-99.A 12919 15181 ELEC.SALES.CA-ALL.A 255224 247680 6.13%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Massachusetts thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-MA-99.A 2083 2146 ELEC.SALES.MA-ALL.A 53285 50261 4.27%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Arizona thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-AZ-99.A 2265 2574 ELEC.SALES.AZ-ALL.A 78346 77720 3.31%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : New Jersey thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-NJ-99.A 1912 2202 ELEC.SALES.NJ-ALL.A 76017 73345 3.00%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Vermont thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-VT-99.A 130 153 ELEC.SALES.VT-ALL.A 5531 5401 2.83%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Rhode Island thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-RI-99.A 95 180 ELEC.SALES.RI-ALL.A 7583 7347 2.45%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Connecticut thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-CT-99.A 500 600 ELEC.SALES.CT-ALL.A 28834 27755 2.16%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Nevada thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-NV-99.A 496 680 ELEC.SALES.NV-ALL.A 37780 37410 1.82%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Maryland thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-MD-99.A 849 971 ELEC.SALES.MD-ALL.A 62086 60588 1.60%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Utah thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-UT-99.A 394 460 ELEC.SALES.UT-ALL.A 31242 30663 1.50%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : New York thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-NY-99.A 1497 1855 ELEC.SALES.NY-ALL.A 149930 144400 1.28%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : New Hampshire thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-NH-99.A 108 130 ELEC.SALES.NH-ALL.A 11046 10691 1.22%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : New Mexico thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-NM-99.A 250 300 ELEC.SALES.NM-ALL.A 24049 25007 1.20%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Colorado thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-CO-99.A 590 634 ELEC.SALES.CO-ALL.A 56450 56272 1.13%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Delaware thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-DE-99.A 110 124 ELEC.SALES.DE-ALL.A 11773 11237 1.10%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : District Of Columbia thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-DC-99.A 71 85 ELEC.SALES.DC-ALL.A 11358 11004 0.77%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Maine thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-ME-99.A 55 77 ELEC.SALES.ME-ALL.A 12355 11815 0.65%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Oregon thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-OR-99.A 205 257 ELEC.SALES.OR-ALL.A 49326 47884 0.54%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : South Carolina thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-SC-99.A 249 329 ELEC.SALES.SC-ALL.A 81641 79903 0.41%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Missouri thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-MO-99.A 232 294 ELEC.SALES.MO-ALL.A 82056 77285 0.38%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Pennsylvania thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-PA-99.A 416 487 ELEC.SALES.PA-ALL.A 148977 145014 0.34%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Iowa thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-IA-99.A 126 160 ELEC.SALES.IA-ALL.A 51211 50023 0.32%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Florida thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-FL-99.A 429 687 ELEC.SALES.FL-ALL.A 238565 237728 0.29%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Louisiana thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-LA-99.A 229 241 ELEC.SALES.LA-ALL.A 94186 90602 0.27%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Texas thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-TX-99.A 716 1001 ELEC.SALES.TX-ALL.A 424419 410118 0.24%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Idaho thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-ID-99.A 33 58 ELEC.SALES.ID-ALL.A 23754 23814 0.24%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Washington thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-WA-99.A 150 210 ELEC.SALES.WA-ALL.A 90006 89374 0.23%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Georgia thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-GA-99.A 270 307 ELEC.SALES.GA-ALL.A 139866 138088 0.22%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : North Carolina thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-NC-99.A 212 273 ELEC.SALES.NC-ALL.A 138287 135608 0.20%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Montana thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-MT-99.A 20 24 ELEC.SALES.MT-ALL.A 14839 15069 0.16%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Minnesota thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-MN-99.A 81 100 ELEC.SALES.MN-ALL.A 68708 65011 0.15%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Wisconsin thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-WI-99.A 75 100 ELEC.SALES.WI-ALL.A 70960 69208 0.14%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Illinois thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-IL-99.A 95 188 ELEC.SALES.IL-ALL.A 142655 137196 0.14%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Ohio thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-OH-99.A 153 194 ELEC.SALES.OH-ALL.A 152915 145525 0.13%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Indiana thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-IN-99.A 98 127 ELEC.SALES.IN-ALL.A 104194 97286 0.13%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Virginia thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-VA-99.A 82 132 ELEC.SALES.VA-ALL.A 118166 116949 0.11%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Michigan thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-MI-99.A 79 110 ELEC.SALES.MI-ALL.A 104869 100377 0.11%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Tennessee thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-TN-99.A 90 94 ELEC.SALES.TN-ALL.A 102911 97566 0.10%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Kansas thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-KS-99.A 27 38 ELEC.SALES.KS-ALL.A 42037 40154 0.09%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Arkansas thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-AR-99.A 22 35 ELEC.SALES.AR-ALL.A 49603 47917 0.07%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Alaska thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-AK-99.A 3 4 ELEC.SALES.AK-ALL.A 5972 5841 0.07%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Kentucky thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-KY-99.A 32 40 ELEC.SALES.KY-ALL.A 76611 73407 0.05%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Wyoming thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-WY-99.A 6 9 ELEC.SALES.WY-ALL.A 16865 16750 0.05%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Nebraska thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-NE-99.A 11 15 ELEC.SALES.NE-ALL.A 30939 30003 0.05%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : West Virginia thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-WV-99.A 10 12 ELEC.SALES.WV-ALL.A 33647 33245 0.04%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Oklahoma thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-OK-99.A 11 20 ELEC.SALES.OK-ALL.A 64575 63742 0.03%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Mississippi thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-MS-99.A 11 14 ELEC.SALES.MS-ALL.A 50390 49393 0.03%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : Alabama thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-AL-99.A 11 14 ELEC.SALES.AL-ALL.A 90280 87735 0.02%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : South Dakota thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-SD-99.A 1 1 ELEC.SALES.SD-ALL.A 12857 12694 0.01%

Small-scale solar photovoltaic : North Dakota thousand megawatthours ELEC.GEN.DPV-ND-99.A 0 1 ELEC.SALES.ND-ALL.A 20670 21044 0.00%


Page 7 of 7

MPSC Case No. U-20697 Michigan EIBC's and IEI's Responses to

CE Third Set of Discovery Requests

20697-CE-MEIBC-10: On page 16 of Dr. Sherman’s direct testimony, she states that “I was not yet working in my current role in energy policy in Michigan during the efforts to craft the 2008 and 2016 energy laws. However, in my current capacity, I have had a number of conversations with advocates and elected officials who were present during those negotiations. Based on those conversations, it is my understanding that the caps for the DG program was established in 2008 as part of PA 295 in combination with the initial institution of net metering in the state.” Please specify all advocates, elected officials, or other individuals that Dr. Sherman conversed with concerning the intent of the 2008 and 2016 energy laws during or prior to the development of Dr. Sherman’s testimony. Please also specify the number of conversations that Dr. Sherman had and the date when such conversations occurred.

Response:

Objection by Counsel: Michigan EIBC objects to this discovery request to the extent the request seeks a document that Michigan EIBC does not possess, or the results of an analysis that Michigan EIBC has not performed and is not required to perform. There is no obligation to perform tasks or generate information on behalf of a requesting party in the manner proposed. Michigan EIBC also objects to this discovery request as written. Subject to and without waiving this objection, Michigan EIBC responds as follows:

Advocates, elected officials and other individuals who spoke, in part, regarding the caps in question can be viewed via the following links to the legislative hearings that discussed HB 5145 and SB 597 before the House Energy Committee and the Senate Energy and Technology Committee on the following dates:

House Energy Committee: • June 16, 2020 (HB 5145):

https://www.house.mi.gov/SharedVideo/PlayVideoArchive.html?video=ENER-061620.mp4

Senate Energy and Technology Committee: • February 11, 2020 (SB 596; SB 597; SB 598):

https://misenate.viebit.com/player.php?hash=lWeyPggjWO1w• February 25, 2020 (SB 596; SB 597; SB 598):

https://misenate.viebit.com/player.php?hash=AkTDMtmQhY66• March 3, 2020 (SB 596; SB 597; SB 598):

https://misenate.viebit.com/player.php?hash=Kz6rCPeWYHgu• March 10, 2020 (SB 596; SB 597; SB 598):

https://misenate.viebit.com/player.php?hash=9DBsv5ODQB9f



Page 1 of 2

https://www.house.mi.gov/SharedVideo/PlayVideoArchive.html?video=ENER-061620.mp4

https://misenate.viebit.com/player.php?hash=lWeyPggjWO1w

https://misenate.viebit.com/player.php?hash=AkTDMtmQhY66

https://misenate.viebit.com/player.php?hash=Kz6rCPeWYHgu

https://misenate.viebit.com/player.php?hash=9DBsv5ODQB9f

MPSC Case No. U-20697 Michigan EIBC's and IEI's Responses to

CE Third Set of Discovery Requests

20697-CE-MEIBC-11: On page 16 of Dr. Sherman’s direct testimony, she states that “I was not yet working in my current role in energy policy in Michigan during the efforts to craft the 2008 and 2016 energy laws. However, in my current capacity, I have had a number of conversations with advocates and elected officials who were present during those negotiations. Based on those conversations, it is my understanding that the caps for the DG program was established in 2008 as part of PA 295 in combination with the initial institution of net metering in the state.” Please indicate how Dr. Sherman arrives to her “understanding” that the caps for the DG program was established in 2008 as part of PA 295 in combination with the initial institution on net metering in the state.

Response:

The referenced testimony contains a typographical error. The reference to the “DG program” in the sentence that begins “Based on those conversations,…” should have instead referred to “net metering.”

Please see the answer to 20697-CE-MEIBC-10 in further response to this question.



Page 2 of 2

STATE OF MICHIGANBEFORE THE MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

*****

In the Matter of the application of ) CONSUMERS ENERGY COMPANY ) for authority to increase its rates for the ) Case No. U-20697 generation and distribution of electricity and ) for other relief. ) ________________________________________ )

PROOF OF SERVICE

STATE OF MICHIGAN ) ) ss.

COUNTY OF INGHAM )

Sarah E. Jackinchuk, the undersigned, being first duly sworn, deposes and says that she is

a Legal Assistant at Varnum LLP and that on the 5th day of August, 2020 she served copy of the

Official Exhibits EIB-1 through EIB-16 on behalf of Michigan Energy Innovation Business

Council and Institute for Energy Innovation upon those individuals listed on the Service List via

email.

__________________________________ Sarah E. Jackinchuk

U-20697 Service List

Administrative Law Judge Hon. Sally L. Wallace [email protected]

Counsel for MPSC Staff Amit T. Singh Daniel E. Sonneveldt Michael J. Orris Benjamin J. Holwerda Heather Durian Monica M. Stephens Spencer A. Sattler Lori Mayabb [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

Counsel for Consumers Energy Company Michael Rampe Bret A. Totoraitis Robert W. Beach Kelly M. Hall Gary A. Gensch Anne M. Uitvlugt Theresa A.G. Staley Ian F. Burgess [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

Counsel for Attorney General Celeste R. Gill [email protected]

Counsel for Association of Businesses Advocating Tariff EquityBryan A. Brandenburg Michael J. Pattwell Stephen A. Campbell Jeffry Pollock [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

Counsel for the Kroger Company Kurt J. Boehm Jody Kyler Cohn Michael L. Kurtz Kevin Higgins Justin Bieber [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

Counsel for Michigan Environmental Council (MEC) Christopher M. Bzdok Tracy Jane Andrews Lydia Barbash-Riley Karla Gerds Kimberly Flynn [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

Counsel for Walmart, Inc. Melissa M. Horne [email protected]

Counsel for Michigan Cable Telecommunications Association (“MCTA”) Michael Ashton Shaina Reed [email protected] [email protected]

Counsel for Midland Cogeneration Venture Limited Richard J. Aaron Jason T. Hanselman John A. Janiszewski [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

Counsel for Hemlock Semiconductor Operations, LLC Jennifer Utter Heston [email protected]

Counsel for Environmental Law & Policy Center, the Ecology Center, the Solar Energy Industries Association, Vote Solar and the Great Lakes Renewable Energy AssociationMargrethe K. Kearney Nikhil Vijaykar Maureen Tabet, Legal Assistant [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

Counsel for Michigan State Utility Workers Council Benjamin L. King John R. Canzano [email protected] [email protected]

Counsel for Citizens Utility Board, City of Grand Rapids, and NRDC Christopher M. Bzdok Tracy Jane Andrews Lydia Barbash-Riley Karla Gerds Kimberly Flynn Breanna Thomas [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

Counsel for Energy Michigan, Inc. Timothy J. Lundgren Laura A. Chappelle Justin K. Ooms [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

Counsel for ChargePoint Inc. Timothy J. Lundgren Justin K. Ooms [email protected] [email protected]

Counsel for Residential Customer Group Don L. Keskey Brian W. Coyer [email protected] [email protected]

16739857_1.docx

Documents

August 5, 2020 Executive Secretary Michigan Public Service