[{"_1":2,"_87":-5,"_88":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},"mediaId",6156223,"mediaKeyId","5471319-ca1b8ec191ca6483a17d41ce95629a58","parentId",5471319,"title","PUC hearing centers on Black Hills' request to waive hosting-capacity map rule; costs and benefits disputed","audioSeconds",14278,"startMs",2321000,"endMs",16599000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5471319-ca1b8ec191ca6483a17d41ce95629a58&start=2321&end=16599","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5471319-ca1b8ec191ca6483a17d41ce95629a58/thumbnail_2321000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6156223/Colorado/PUC-hearing-centers-on-Black-Hills-request-to-waive-hosting-capacity-map-rule-costs-and-benefits-disputed","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6156223-6cea2f88d0e476dae1d177d16003bf3b/orig.mp4?Expires=1770886227&Signature=abDcLROxOtcwLkb7lvX8OE0BTrUYqiDI5i2RLszQiAdecoR0Rxo87XjoS-DgWluIz4VmV7TCGlEsk1JWrsfEGirDU2xx8tEgyC8-rLFEJjpBJuCtb5j9RuhTgFRuydesBVf4qH7I6TNqZeL4U-~0901hJRE6CbGLribZhd-6umCSBlgWKSjNDZy44~6-ANdJ6dcrWJXjCedl07OjcDryiZ0HoxmNCNhPo~m~rh0jNWc8q961GoFXHK1WPIb-1WhMk0SRDeOx9gugKU6YFKPYOBTrai6nUe4ZE5~3LQQseUXtV7-YWeBJT12Dt9s4OK9ccjRPQBIYNPmpUhZ5axdE9A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","","date","2025-07-24T20:01:16Z","article","Black Hills Colorado Electric LLC sought a waiver of the Public Utilities Commission rule requiring a hosting capacity analysis (HCA) and a public hosting-capacity map during an evidentiary hearing on July 24, 2025. The company said the exercise would impose substantial costs on customers and that local developers have not asked for the publicly hosted product now mandated by the rule.

The dispute was the single contested issue remaining in a broader settlement among Black Hills, trial staff and the Utility Consumer Advocate (UCA). Under a settlement term described in testimony, Black Hills and commission trial staff agreed the company will \"provide a detailed updated cost estimate in its next DSP filing for the development of a hosting capacity analysis and map, and at which time the company would have the option of requesting a waiver to the rule requirement.\" That settlement term is in the record as hearing exhibit 107 (settlement testimony) and was described repeatedly in cross-examination.

Why this matters: hosting-capacity analyses and maps are intended to help developers and local stakeholders identify locations on a distribution system where distributed energy resources (DER) such as rooftop solar and storage can connect with lower need for system upgrades. The issue affects developers, customers who pay the utility's costs through rates, and the PUC's oversight of distribution planning.

Costs and timing cited in testimony
- Black Hills relied on a July 2024 consultant report by ICF (filed in evidence) for its cost estimates. The ICF appendix lists three options to develop and implement HCA and mapping. Testimony cited the ICF figures: an option priced at about $290,000 for development of an HCA and map, a lower-cost option at roughly $68,675 plus internal-resource commitments, and a separate range of roughly $553,000 to $810,000 for a web portal or publicly accessible presentation layer.
- Company witnesses and counsel told the commission the $290,000 figure from ICF covers development of the analysis and mapping but does not include costs to design, host or operate an online portal that would make the map publicly available; the portal-range estimate in the ICF appendix was described in settlement testimony as unclear about what portion of that range would be attributable specifically to hosting-capacity functionality.
- ICF’s time estimates cited in testimony show two options with about six months for implementation and a lower-cost option taking about 15 months.

Positions in the hearing
- Eric Harrington, director of regulatory for Black Hills Energy Service Company, testified Black Hills requested the waiver because the company and staff view the cost to customers and the lack of demand from local solar installers as central concerns. Harrington said the company had \"been very successful at interconnecting solar customers\" without a hosting-capacity map and argued consumers should not now be charged for what the company characterized as a \"nice to have\" capability. In his testimony he said, \"Our customers would be paying for, an asset that we don't think is very beneficial or useful.\"
- UCA's witness, consultant Chris Villareal, and UCA counsel argued the commission should weigh the benefits as well as the costs. Villareal's settlement testimony states that \"providing information about the distribution system via an online portal is increasingly vital to the development of DER across Colorado and for Black Hills customers.\" Villareal also pointed to national/state guidance and to other utilities' examples to support the value of standardized, publicly accessible maps.
- Trial staff took no position that would defeat the settlement but asked for procedures (and time) to review any updated cost information filed later; staff counsel and witnesses questioned whether deferring the work indefinitely would leave the commission and stakeholders without information that could inform long-term planning.

Settlement and next steps
- The settlement term in the record between Black Hills and trial staff commits the company to provide an updated cost estimate in its next DSP filing and preserves the company's option to request a waiver at that time. That approach leaves the commission with a choice now about whether to require the company to proceed or to accept the settlement approach, which would revisit the issue in the next DSP.
- Black Hills previously sought and received a waiver in its first DSP proceeding (noted in the record as an interim decision in 23A-0357E), but that grant applied to that proceeding and did not create a permanent exemption. In this second DSP the company filed a new waiver motion (recorded as hearing exhibit 305) that remains pending.
- Parties discussed procedural follow-up: the bench (chair) indicated a bench order or short written direction would follow confidential-session discussion points, and the parties agreed to the existing schedule for statements of position (staff noted the schedule lists Aug. 22 as the due date, with parties discussing minor adjustments if needed).

What remains unresolved
- No final PUC decision on the waiver was reached at the hearing. The record now contains the ICF report, the company's motion for a waiver (hearing exhibit 305), settlement testimony preserving a future updated cost estimate and the company's option to file for a waiver again, and UCA's testimony urging the commission to order the work now or require a clearer showing that the benefits would not justify the costs.

Ending
- The commission left the evidentiary record open for the parties' further filings and for any required bench order from the chair. If the commission accepts the settlement term as written, the company will file an updated cost estimate in its next DSP and will retain the option to request a waiver at that future date. If the commission requires development of an HCA and public map now, parties have identified costs (development ~$290,000; portal $553,000–$810,000) and timeframes (6–15 months) that would inform scheduling and potential rate recovery discussions.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","25A-0062E Black Hills Colorado Electric - 2025 DSP, Hearing Commissioner - 07.24.25 - HRA","oneSentenceSummary","Black Hills Colorado Electric LLC asked the Colorado Public Utilities Commission on July 24 to waive a rule requiring a hosting capacity analysis and public map, saying the work would be costly and that the local solar industry has not demanded a public portal.","taxTitle","Public Utilities Commission, Governor's Boards and Commissions, Organizations, Executive, Colorado","taxId",28165,"location","Colorado","headline","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},6156218,"Commission questions Black Hills’ planned distribution spending and potential rate impacts",919,8716000,9635000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5471319-ca1b8ec191ca6483a17d41ce95629a58&start=8716&end=9635","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5471319-ca1b8ec191ca6483a17d41ce95629a58/thumbnail_8716000.jpg","/articles/6156218/Colorado/Commission-questions-Black-Hills-planned-distribution-spending-and-potential-rate-impacts","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6156218-6ca6fe6e6659437a3bfb49ac7c0cb154/orig.mp4?Expires=1770886227&Signature=OvCZ5BM67u4C2qAQNhaiQsPk4PwID8Jg8ITZM1B3qe5KnOeBWv8ZEbE-urqTMdMigtDsqwqOk5SWqS08zhoVMNLmfLtJsI3W7rlBCrGNjeXf1KUdAezSFSdoCnRkrXdIZfn0-knJT2NZyk8xvLvP073I71LSxo71T6ZH8R7nhaM4ettHD1wn7uFXNeyXndVAZG5~tsNB8eV7IbFpEX08mFiwYcPvov3bgL7y7SUEYyLNqbG59B537n26nb7rHsQ4d53XLSAKwho2s2Q0UWigYpSjliY~FkKu0XZQnZ5yX4rRK1UBATqNJ4clKx-XrBGtWQDrs9k~4-8J9kYOrLUDUw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Commissioners at the July 24 evidentiary hearing pressed Black Hills and commission staff on whether the Public Utilities Commission can or should do more to limit customer rate increases tied to a large planned increase in distribution capital spending.

Staff and company testimony introduced competing perspectives. Black Hills witnesses described a multi-year capital budget process and said the company is revisiting planned spending in reaction to concerns about rates. Staff witnesses and the commission asked whether the PUC can set expectations for distribution capital so rate impacts are better anticipated and potentially constrained.

Key points from the hearing
- Company process and scope: Black Hills witnesses described an annual five‑year capital‑planning process. The company said it is \"scrubbing\" the next five‑year plan to reduce spending while maintaining adequate service.
- Scale of proposed change: In testimony reviewed during the hearing staff and company witnesses said average annual distribution capital spending is proposed to rise substantially (testimony referenced an increase of roughly 78% for the 2026–29 period compared with historical levels). Witnesses said the filing’s capital program would raise rate base materially unless modified.
- Staff concerns about preapproval and prudency: Senior staff witness Eric Haglund read staff’s position that the agency \"sees no way to reconcile the traditional prudency standard with a preapproved level of capital spend.\" Haglund and other staff witnesses emphasized that after‑the‑fact prudency review has limits for constraining future rate impacts.
- Commissioners’ questions on alternatives: Commissioners compared distribution planning to generation proceedings (ERP/CPCN) where the commission approves specific projects or sets parameters and sometimes applies performance incentives. The chair pressed staff on whether a pre‑approved spending baseline could be set for distribution planning and if that would meaningfully limit excessive spending. Staff warned a preapproved cap could act as a floor rather than a ceiling in practice and could put the commission in a difficult position when unanticipated reliability needs arise.

Community and affordability context
- Public outreach: Black Hills said it held one formal stakeholder meeting on Oct. 22, 2024 and additional one‑on‑one outreach with developers, and it described roughly seven active solar installers in its service territory. Company witnesses said they have been able to interconnect net‑metered customers and several community solar projects without a publicly hosted HCA map.
- Rate pressure and tradeoffs: Commissioners expressed frustration that a large distribution capital program could significantly increase base rates and said the record provides limited tools for managing rate‑affordability tradeoffs beyond traditional prudency review in a later rate case. The chair summarized the difficulty bluntly: \"I'm just struggling with how we maintain affordability given the limitations of after the fact prudency review.\" (remarks recorded in the hearing transcript.)

Next steps and procedural notes
- Staff and company said they will continue to update their capital plans and the company will file its updated five‑year capital budget as part of its ongoing DSP cycle. Staff indicated it will continue to review actual investments at the time of a rate case and noted that the commission’s current rules required the company’s DSP filings and stakeholder processes.
- No procedural vote or PUC decision on capital‑spending limits was issued at the hearing.

Ending
- The hearing highlighted a recurring regulatory tension: how to balance investments that improve reliability and system health with the need to keep rates affordable, particularly for smaller utilities with limited customer bases. The PUC record will incorporate the DSP filings, supporting modeling and any updated capital budgets the company submits before the next rate proceedings.","Commissioners and staff pressed Black Hills witnesses about an 78% increase in average annual distribution capital spending in the DSP, asking how the PUC can limit rate increases and whether methods used on generation planning could apply to distribution.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

PUC hearing centers on Black Hills' request to waive hosting-capacity map rule; costs and benefits disputed

Commission questions Black Hills’ planned distribution spending and potential rate impacts