# Presentation: 788142

## Forms Design Issues Resulting From Combining Electric Power Surveys

- Robert H. Rutchik
- Energy Information Administration
- Meeting of the American Statistical Association (ASA)
- Committee on Energy Statistics
- October 5, 2006
- 	This is a working document prepared by the Energy Information Administration (EIA) in order to solicit advice and comment on statistical matters from the American Statistical Association Committee on Energy Statistics.  This topic will be discussed at EIA's fall 2006, meeting with the Committee to be held October 5 and 6, 2006.

## Purpose of Presentation

- Outline issues that have arisen from merging the five EIA survey forms into two surveys
- Committee’s comments on
- Data requirements for both surveys – Is EIA collecting the correct data?
- Combined heat and power plant (CHP) monthly data imputation methodologies
- Sampling cut offs for both surveys
- EIA survey forms and their instructions can be accessed at http://www.eia.doe.gov/oss/forms.html

**Notes:**
The five surveys, again, are as Bob Schnapp discussed, three monthly surveys that will be merged into one form: 
EIA-423: Monthly Cost and Quality of Fuels for Electric Plants Report,
EIA-906: Power Plant Report, and 
EIA-920: Combined Heat and Power Plant Report
A combined heat and power plant produces both heat and electricity from a single heat source. They are commercial and industrial co-generators such as paper mills and refineries

Two annual surveys that will be merged: 
EIA-860: Annual Electric Generator Report  and, 
EIA-767: Steam-Electric and Plant Operation and Design Report, and

Discontinue collecting monthly data from industrial and commercial combined heat and power plants, but continue annual collection.

Benefits, as, Reduce costs to EIA, reduce respondent burden, and provide users with more timely and accurate information

## Data for the Monthly Survey

- Plant level
- Prime mover level
- Annual data on sources and disposition of electricity

**Notes:**
EIA proposes to collect these types of data.

Prime mover: The engine, turbine, water wheel, or similar machine that drives an electric generator; or, for reporting purposes, a device that converts energy to electricity directly (e.g., photovoltaic solar and fuel cells). 

## Plant-Level Data: EIA-423, EIA-906, and EIA-920 Merged Form

| Current Data  | Proposed New Data |
| --- | --- |
| Quantity of receipts | Cost
 Delivered costs (all fuels)
 Commodity (coal and natural gas) |
| Quality  of receipts (heat content and sulfur and ash content) | Primary and secondary transportation modes |
| End of month stocks (coal, residual and distillate fuel oil, jet fuel, and kerosene) | Mine Safety Health Administration Mine Identification Number |
|  | Ending Stocks = Previous Month’s Stocks + Receipts – Consumption +/- Adjustment |

**Notes:**
Column on the left lists the current plant-level data that EIA proposes to collect on the merged survey are.
The right-hand column lists the new data that EIA proposes to collect on this survey. The purpose of these data are to fill gaps in EIA’s published data and forecasts. 
Cost data. Costs indices are published in the trade press, but. No official government source on the price of fuel.

Delivered cost is the cost of fuel, including the invoice price of fuel, transportation charges, taxes, commissions, insurance, and expenses associated with leased or owned equipment used to transport the fuel. 

Transportation mode is not really new. EIA proposes to move the coal transportation mode question on the EIA-6, Coal Distribution Report – Annual to the new survey.  It asks for primary and secondary, if there is more than one mode used, transportation. Example. The problem is would the person completing the form at the receiving facility, particularly the smaller ones, know what were the secondary and primary modes. 
MSHA Mine Identification Number
Bob discussed. The balancing check is important to ensure the integrity of the data. Now, three separate systems and check performed by EIA outside of the IDC system. Very inefficient. One advantage of the consolidated form would be to have the balance done in one system and have it before the forms are submitted to EIA. Numbers do not correlate. Use coal example. Adjustment factor is really a discrepancy explanation. Would make data editing lot easier and better. Improve EIA’s data editing. More efficient and quicker 

## Prime Mover-Level Data Merged Form

- Net and gross generation for all electric Plants
- Gross generation for CHP plants
- Total consumption for all purposes by fuel type
- Heat content by fuel type

**Notes:**

There are heat content differences between receipts and prime mover-level data.  Moisture could enter the coal before it is consumed and lower its heat value.

No fuel used to generate electricity.  As Bob also discussed, EIA proposes to drop it.  We currently have several IERs out on whether or not to use a surrogate variable for it, and if so, what that surrogate will be.

## Merged Monthly Form: Annual Data on Sources and Disposition of Electricity

- Sources
- Gross generation
- Other incoming electricity
- Disposition
- Station use
- Direct use (CHPs)
- Total facility use (station use and direct use for CHPs)
- Retail Sales to Ultimate Customers
- Retail sales to ultimate consumers
- Other outgoing electricity

**Notes:**
These are plant level data and currently collected on both the EIA-906 and EIA-920.  

They too are a balance check for generation.

## Monthly Surveys: Current Sampling Schemes

- EIA-423: Goes to the approximately 740 non-utility electricity generating plants or CHPs whose total fossil-fueled nameplate generating capacity is 50 or more megawatts
- EIA-906: Power Plant Report
- Monthly collects data from a statistical sample of approximately 1,400 plants based on fuel consumed and generating capacity criteria
- Annual collects data form approximately 3,000 plants that do not file the Form EIA-906 monthly
- EIA-920: Combined Heat and Power Plant Report
- Monthly collects data from a sample of approximately 300 plants. Same cut off as EIA-906
- Annual collects data from approximately 700 plants that do not file monthly

**Notes:**
I now want to discuss the current sampling schemes for the three monthly surveys because they are directly related to understanding EIA’s proposed new sampling methodologies for the merged monthly survey, and also for the annual survey that I will discuss shortly. 

EIA does not really use a sample for the EIA-423. It goes SLIDE-.  EIA does not even estimate for plants less than 50 megawatts.
906 and 920 do.
EIA-906: Power Plant
Example:  For plants that consume coal, natural gas, and residual and distillate fuel oil, which is a great majority of the electric plants, all plants with a nameplate capacity of 200 megawatts or greater are sampled. Hydro-electric is 80 megawatts.

EIA-920: Combined Heat and Power Plant report

## Sampling issues and CHP Estimation and for the Merged Monthly Form

- Cut off sample for electric plants
- Generation capacity will determine cut off between monthly and annual respondents
- Goal will be to minimize monthly respondents
- Possible imputation strategies for imputing  monthly numbers for CHP plants
- Benchmark from the data from Independent Power Producers (IPPs)
- Collect monthly data from a small sample of the large CHPs

**Notes:**
EIA has not yet formulated a cut off. 

More specifically, minimizing monthly respondents, in great part, means not having respondents provide data they had not provided before. This is where the discussion of current sampling cut offs applies. The current cut off for the EIA-423 is 50 megawatts or greater. If EIA asks on the merged form CHPs and electric plants that are below this cut off to complete the merged survey EIA will be increasing the number of monthly respondents and using more resources, not less. This is self-defeating. This is one factor in having CHPs respond annually, which Bob Schnapp discussed in his presentation.

Another, related, reason is that CHPS account for five percent of total electricity generation, but 33 percent of electricity processing resources.

Independent power producer is a corporation, person, agency, authority, or other legal entity or instrumentality that owns or operates facilities for the generation of electricity for use primarily by the public, and that is not an electric utility. 

Ideas that we have brought up and on which we would like the committee’s views. 

## Data for the New EIA-860

- No changes to the EIA-860
- Merge to it static data on power plant characteristics from the EIA-767
- Design/physical characteristic data
- Delete operational data from the EIA-767
- Data variable from year to year

**Notes:**
Caught in a budgetary twi-light zone. No money for 2007.  Maybe money in 2008. Could be an interim step for which EIA must be prepared.
EIA does not propose to collect any new data on the merged annual survey. In fact, it proposes
1. No changes to the EIA-860
2. Keep “static” elements from EIA-767

Simple example, Schedule 6, Cooling System Information:

Part A. Annual Operations – Goes
Part B. Design Parameters - Stays

Delete any elements that are variable from year to year such as costs, fly ash by-product, operational and maintenance expenditures for flue gas desulfurization units, and many more.  

## Current Annual Survey Cut Offs

- EIA-860:
- Existing and planned electric generating facilities in the United States with a total generator nameplate capacity of 1 or more megawatts
- Collects generator-level data from approximately 2,700 companies that operate 5,700 plants containing over 16,000 generators
- EIA-767:
- Organic-fueled or combustible renewable steam-electric generating plant with a nameplate capacity of 10 or more megawatts
- Collects boiler-level data from about 1,400 plants

**Notes:**
The EIA-860
Existing and planned within the next five years electric generating facilities in the United States with a total generator nameplate capacity of 1 or more megawatts. 
Collects generator-level data on ownership, generator capacity, fuel capability, operational status, on-line date and actual or planned retirement date, regulatory status, energy sources, prime mover, net summer capacity, net winter capacity, in-service date, NAICS designation, and fuel switching capability. 
Approximately 2,700 companies that operate 5,700 (both existing and planned) plants containing over 16,000 generators file this form. 
The EIA-767
U.S. organic-fueled or combustible renewable steam-electric generating plant with a nameplate capacity of 10 or more megawatts regardless of current ownership and/or operation.  
Collects boiler-level data on design parameters and annual operations on a plant's boilers, generators, cooling systems, flue gas particulate collectors, flue gas desulfurization units, stacks, and flues. 
About 1,400 plants. Approximately 770 plants have a nameplate capacity of 100 megawatts or greater, and must complete the entire Form EIA-767. Smaller plants are not required to provide certain information, such as electric generator and cooling system data. 

## Sampling Cut Off for the Annual Survey

- Generation capacity determines cut off
- Goal is to have ten percent of plants that have ninety percent of generation respond each year
- EIA’s proposal is that this would include most plants between 500 and 600 megawatts and above
- All other respondents would respond every third year

**Notes:**

Cut off will be generation. 10 percent of plants, 90 percent of generation. Inder’s plan is that it is most plants between 500 and 600 megawatts and above.
Below that:  One third one year, one third the next year, and the remaining third the third year.

## Questions

- Do we have the correct data on the EIA-423, EIA-906 and EIA-920 combined form?
- What should EIA be aware of in formulating an imputation methodology for CHP plants?
- Do we have the correct data on the combined EIA-860 and EIA-767?
- What does the committee think of the cut off methodologies for both new surveys?