20250625Staff Comments.pdf

RECEIVED
June 25, 2025
ERIKA K. MELANSON IDAHO PUBLIC
DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL UTILITIES COMMISSION
IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
PO BOX 83720
BOISE, IDAHO 83720-0074
[phone]
IDAHO BAR NO. 11560
Street Address for Express Mail:
11331 W CHINDEN BLVD, BLDG 8, SUITE 201-A
BOISE, ID 83714
Attorney for the Commission Staff
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION )
OF RIVERSIDE ELECTRIC COMPANY, ) CASE NO. C12-E-25-01
LIMITED AND CITY OF RUPERT FOR AN )
ORDER APPROVING A SERVICE )
TERRITORY AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE ) COMMENTS OF THE
APPLICANTS ) COMMISSION STAFF
COMMISSION STAFF ("STAFF") OF the Idaho Public Utilities Commission
("Commission"), by and through its Attorney of record, Erika K. Melanson, Deputy Attorney
General, submits the following comments.
BACKGROUND
On April 16, 2025, Riverside Electric Company, Limited("Company") and City of
Rupert ("Rupert") (collectively"Parties") applied to the Commission requesting approval of a
Service Territory Agreement("Agreement")between the Company and Rupert.
The Electric Supplier Stabilization Act("ESSA")prohibits an electric supplier(e.g., a
utility, municipality, or co-op) from serving another electric supplier's existing or former
customers. Idaho Code § 61-332B. Section 61-332(2)provides that the purpose of the ESSA is
to: (1)promote harmony between electric suppliers; (2)prohibit the "pirating" of consumers; (3)
STAFF COMMENTS 1 JUNE 25, 2025

discourage duplication of electric facilities; (4) actively supervise the conduct of electric
suppliers; and(5) stabilize service territories and consumers. The ESSA enables electric utilities
to allocate territories and customers if certain conditions are satisfied. The ESSA allows electric
suppliers to contract for the purpose of"allocating territories, consumers, and future consumers .
. . and designating which territories and consumers are to be served by which contracting electric
supplier." Idaho Code § 61-333(1). Such contracts must be submitted to the Commission for
approval. Id. The Commission will approve contracts reviewed under the ESSA if, after notice
and opportunity for hearing, the Commission finds that the Agreement conforms with the
purposes of the ESSA. See Idaho Code §§ 61-333(1) and 61-33413(1).
The Parties have for some time had a territory Agreement between them. Application at
2. The Parties state that such Agreement predates the amendment to Idaho Code § 61-333 that
requires Commission approval of territory agreements; therefore, the Parties seek Commission
approval of a written memorialization of the existing territory Agreement. Id. The parties
included a copy of the Agreement attached as Exhibit A to the Application. Id.
The Parties represent that the Agreement was negotiated between the Parties to settle a
service territory between the parties,provide for stability of service with consumers, to eliminate
duplicating of services, and to provide safety in the respective territories. Id. The Parties state
that they believe the Agreement is in the best interest of both entities and the customers of both
entities. Id.
STAFF ANALYSIS
Staff reviewed the Service Territory Agreement and recommends that the Commission
approve the Agreement. Staff believes the Agreement is in conformance with the provisions and
intent of the ESSA. The Agreement includes several terms and conditions that Staff believes are
consistent with the purpose of ESSA. Some important terms and conditions include: (1) the
defined boundaries between the two service territories that each Party will use to serve new
customers; (2)the assignment of existing customers in the defined territories; (3) a process for
entering into a written agreement to serve a new customer that can be more efficiently served by
the other Party; and(4) the exceptions of customers in the defined territories.
Further, Staff discovered that paragraph 5 "ATTORNEYS' FEES"was revised to be
consistent with Idaho Code § 61-617A and that paragraph 6 "ANNUAL FRANCHISE FEE" and
STAFF COMMENTS 2 JUNE 25, 2025

paragraph 12 "COMMUNICATION"were added to the unexecuted agreement that was
submitted in Case No. C 12-E-24-02. That case was dismissed by the Commission through Order
No. 36360,because the agreement that was submitted was not properly executed by the Parties.
Staff believes that the annual 3% franchise fee in paragraph 6 is aligned with Idaho Code § 50-
329A and that paragraph 12 could assist in resolving potential issues between the Parties in the
future.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Commission approve the executed Agreement between the
Company and Rupert, pursuant to Idaho Code § 61-333.
Respectfully submitted this 25th day of June 2025.
Erika K. Melanson
Deputy Attorney General
Technical Staff. Seungjae Lee
I:\Utility\UMISC\COMMENTS\C12-E-25-01 Comments.docx
STAFF COMMENTS 3 JUNE 25, 2025

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE THIS 251h DAY OF JUNE 2025, SERVED
THE FOREGOING COMMENTS OF THE COMMISSION STAFF, IN CASE NO. C12-
E-25-01, BY E-MAILING A COPY THEREOF TO THE FOLLOWING:
Riverside Electric Co.,Ltd.
BRADLEY S. RICHARDSON
CAMERON G. FRANCIS
ATTORNEYS FOR RIVERSIDE ELECTRIC
CO., LTD.
738 S. BRIDGEWAY PLACE, STE. 100
EAGLE, ID 83616
E-MAIL: Brad&garrettrichardson.com
Cameron(d),garrettrichards on.com
City of'Rupert:
LANCE D. STEVENSON
ATTORNEY FOR CITY OF RUPERT
715 6TH STREET
RUPERT, ID 83350
E-MAIL: Istevenson(kminidokacoun . .id.-ov
PATRICIA JORDAfT, SECRETARY
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE