20250807Comments.pdf

RECEIVED
August 7, 2025
IDAHO PUBLIC
I Peter J. Richardson ISB # 3195 UTILITIES COMMISSION
Gregory M. Adams ISB # 7454
2 515 N. 271h Street
3 Boise, Idaho 83702
[phone] DD
4 [phone] Cell
5 peter(i�richardsonadams.com
6
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
7
8
9 IN THE MATTER OF COMMISSION Case No.: GNR-E-25-02
STAFF' S APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL
10 OF A FILING PROCESS FOR WILDFIRE
11 MITIGATION PLANS COMMENTS OF POTLATCHDELTIC
CORPORATION ON STAFF'S
12 APPLICATION FOR A WILDFIRE
MITIGATION PLAN FILING PROCESS
13
14
15 COMES NOW, POTLATCHDELTIC CORPORATION, hereinafter referred to as
16
"PotlatchDeltic," and lodges its Comments on the Staff s Application for a Wildfire Mitigation
17
18 Plan Filing Process (the "Application") and the Staff s Supplement thereto (the "Supplement")
19 pursuant Order No. 36686 of the Idaho Public Utilities Commission(`Commission")
20 PotlatchDeltic appreciates the Staff s efforts to arrive at a process implementing the
21 newly enacted Wildfire Standard of Care Act; (the "Act").' PotlatchDeltic looks forward to
22
possibly commenting substantively on the contents of the Wildfire Mitigation Plans that will be
23
24
25
26 Idaho Code Section 61-1801 et. seq.
COMMENTS OF POTLATCHDELTIC CORPORATION ON STAFF'S APPLICATION FOR A WILDFIRE
27 MITIGATION PLAN FILING PROCESS
GNR-E-25-02
28
PAGE I

I filed by the various electric corporations that may affect PotlatchDeltic's subsidiary's holdings i
2 Idaho. PotlatchDeltic's comments herein are necessarily limited to the process that Staff has
3
proposed as well as those few substantive issues implicated or directly raised in Staffs
4
5
Application and Supplement. PotlatchDeltic will subsequently substantively comment on those
6 yet-to-be-filed Wildfire Mitigation Plans ("WMP") that may have an impact on its holdings once
7 they are filed with the Commission.
8 PotlatchDeltic is a publicly traded corporation that stewards large tracts of commercially
9
valuable timbered land in North Central Idaho. PotlatchDeltic's land holdings host several Idaho
10
I utilities and/or electric corporations that have easements on, or near and/or traverse and
12 otherwise impact its properties in Idaho. PotlatchDeltic's properties, and its business operations
13 are uniquely susceptible to wildfire, the mitigation of which is essential to the continued viability
14 and the sustainability of PotlatchDeltic's business operations in the state of Idaho.
15
COMMENTS ON THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION STAFF'S
16
WILDFIRE MITIGATION PLAN GUIDELINES'
17
18 1. Balancing, Mitigation Costs
19 a. Quantify the Cost of Risk and the Cost of Mitigation Measures:
20 The Act at Section 1803(3) mandates a balancing of the costs of wildfire mitigation with
21
the resulting reduction of wildfire risk. Specifically, the Act requires that:
22
23
24
25
z 26 Exhibit 1 to Staff s Supplement to Application, hereinafter"Guidelines."
COMMENTS OF POTLATCHDELTIC CORPORATION ON STAFF'S APPLICATION FOR A WILDFIRE
27 MITIGATION PLAN FILING PROCESS
GN R-E-25-02
28
PAGE 2

I Each wildfire mitigation plan shall be developed using approaches and methods that are
designed to protect the public interest and are reflective of and commensurate with the
2 size and complexity of the electric corporation's operation and of the nature of the fire
3 risk. At a minimum, each wildfire mitigation plan shall identify a means for mitigating
wildfire risk that reflect a reasonable balance of mitigation costs with the resulting
4 reduction of wildfire risk.
5 The cost of mitigation measures are easily quantified. However, in order to balance fire risks
6
against mitigation costs it will be necessary to quantify the wildfire risk. The requirement to
7
8
quantify wildfire risk is inherent in the legislative mandate that this Commission strike a balance
9 between risks and costs --- it is not possible to strike a balance if only one side of the equation is
10 known. The value of the assets (homes, farms, timbered land and indeed human life) at risk of
I I being damaged, destroyed or killed by wildfire must be factored into the balancing equation. In
12
making its findings as to the reasonableness of the balancing test inherent in a WMP the
13
14 Commission will have to compare the electric corporation's' income, equity holdings and/or
15 balance sheet against the value of the assets and lives that are placed at risk due to a wild fire that
16 may be associated with or caused by a particular or electrical corporation's operations. Only
17 after these two numbers are known (or reasonably estimated) will the Commission be able to
18
`reasonably balance mitigation costs.'
19
20
21
22
23
24 3 The Act at Section 61-1803(2)distinguishes between an electrical corporation that is a PUC
regulated public utility and an electrical corporation that is not a PLC regulated public utility. As used herein and in
25 the Act,"electrical corporation"generically describes both regulated public utilities and non-regulated cooperative
26 and municipal utilities—unless specially noted otherwise.
COMMENTS OF POTLATCHDELTIC CORPORATION ON STAFF'S APPLICATION FOR A WILDFIRE
27 MITIGATION PLAN FILING PROCESS
GN R-E-25-02
28
PAGE 3

I b. Apply a Balancing Test
2 Once the cost of wildfire risks are quantified then, presumably, there will be a point in the
3
balancing investigation that the Commission determines an electric corporation's mitigation
4
5 costs when compared to the cost of the risk of wildfire "reflect a reasonable balance." Whether
6 that balance is equal (e.g. one mitigation-dollar for every risk-dollar) or unequal (e.g. one
7 mitigation-dollar buys two dollars of wildfire risk prevention or vice versa) is, pursuant to the
8 Act, a judgment call for the Commission to make.
9
The Act gives the Commission only two options when considering a WMP. It may reject
10
I the plan, or it may approve the plan, it has no authority to modify, or revise submitted WMPs.4
12 In the event the Commission determines that an electrical corporation's mitigation measures are
13 inadequate or are outweighed by the wildfire risk costs it will have to reject the plan. However,
14 in such a case the Commission would be within its authority to explain the reason(s) for the
15
rejection and invite the electrical corporation to refile a modified WMP that conforms to the
16
17 Commission's concerns. An electrical corporation without a Commission-approved WMP is
18 exposed to damage claims in the event of a wildfire that is caused, in whole or in part, by the
19 fault of the electrical corporation.
20 The ultimate risk to the public is that the Commission approves a WMP `on the cheap'
21
which does not adequately mitigate wildfire risk but at the same time provides the electric
22
23 corporation with liability immunity. In such a case the general public is left with no remedy for
24
25
26 4 Idaho Code Section 61-1804(1).
COMMENTS OF POTLATCHDELTIC CORPORATION ON STAFF'S APPLICATION FOR A WILDFIRE
27 MITIGATION PLAN FILING PROCESS
GN R-E-25-02
28
PAGE 4

I potentially catastrophic, life-threatening wildfires. Underscoring this point is the fact that it is
2 prohibitively expensive to purchase timberland wildfire insurance. Thus, Idaho's timberland is,
3
for the most part, uninsured against the risks of wildfires. This fact, alone, weighs heavily on the
4
5 scales on the side of a robust and well-funded wildfire mitigation regime funded by Idaho's
6 electric corporations that are located in timbered areas.
7 The legislature has literally tasked the Commission with a Solomon-like responsibility.
• 8 It must weigh and balance ratepayer costs with the cost of preventing (mitigating) destructive,
9
costly and life-threatening wildfires. This dilemma will be starkly apparent when (io, after
10
I having balanced the cost of wildfire risks with the cost of mitigation measures, the Commission
12 finds an electric corporation's income and/or balance sheet are insufficient to pay the costs of
13 reasonably mitigating those wildfire risks. In which case the Commission will be required, unde
14 the Act, to reject the plan. Such a drastic response benefits neither the at-risk public nor the
15
shareholders/members of the electric corporation. In such a case, the Commission would have
16
17 two options. For a regulated public utility, the Commission should order the utility to commit to
18 spend the funds necessary to prepare and implement a new wildfire mitigation plan that
19 adequately mitigates the risk of wildfires. For non-regulated electric corporations over which
20 the Commission does not have ratemaking authority, the Commission should reject the plan and
21
inform the applicant what it must do to prepare an adequate plan should it ever want to take
22
23 advantage of the immunities offered by the Act.
24 At the end of the day, the Commission should not shy away from the fact that wildfire
25 mitigation measures are potentially expensive to implement and that reasonable plans may result
26
COMMENTS OF POTLATCHDELTIC CORPORATION ON STAFF'S APPLICATION FOR A WILDFIRE
27 MITIGATION PLAN FILING PROCESS
GN R-E-25-02
28
PAGES

I in increases in the rates retail customers pay. Rate impacts are to be expected and are not
2 necessarily unreasonable. Indeed, ratepayers in Idaho enjoy some of the lowest electric rates in
3
the country. According to the U.S. Energy Information Agency, "Idaho has the third-lowest
4
5 residential sector average electricity price among the states."5 Therefore all balancing tests
6 must begin with that fact in mind, to wit: the scales are already tipped heavily in favor of the
7 ratepayers right out of the gate. It is fair,just and reasonable to expect that the ratepayers will
8 shoulder their fair share of the increasing costs of maintaining the fire safety of the electric
9
system that was built to serve them—especially when they are buying not only a fire-safe system
10
I but are also insulating the owners of that electric system from liability.
12 2. Preventative Actions and Programs
13 "May" vs. "Shall"
14 The Commission Staff s Exhibit One to its Supplemental Comments on page 3 provides
15
the following laundry list of"Preventative Actions and Programs" that "may" be included in a
16
WMP:
17
18 Situational Awareness Efforts
Asset Inspection
19 System Hardening Strategies
Enhanced Vegetation Management Practices in Risk Zones
20 Operational Practices During Heightened Wildfire Risk Days or Zones
21 Workforce Preparedness
Pilot Programs
22 Community Education
23
24
25 s https://www,eia.gov/state/print.php?sid=ID
Indeed, PotlatchDeltic is a major ratepayer in its own right and is nevertheless not adverse to
26 paying its share of the cost of adequate wildfire mitigation measures.
COMMENTS OF POTLATCHDELTIC CORPORATION ON STAFF'S APPLICATION FOR A WILDFIRE
27 MITIGATION PLAN FILING PROCESS
GN R-E-25-02
28
PAGE 6

I And any Additional Requirements Ordered by the Commission
2 None of the identified programs and/or actions should be made optional by the Commission.
3
PotlatchDeltic respectfully requests that the word "may" be changed to "shall" on the second line
4
5 of page 3 on Exhibit One to Staffs Supplemental Comments.
6 3. Historical Understanding of the Magnitude of the Wildfire Problem
7 It will be helpful for a complete understanding of the magnitude of each entity's wildfire
8 risk exposure to have data on past damage claims associated with fires for which each electric
9
corporation was responsible, either wholly or partially. Each WMP should therefore include a
10
11 description of every wildfire-related damages claim paid by the filing electric corporation for the
12 last twenty years for fires that have occurred wholly or partially within the State of Idaho. This
13 list should include all payments made regardless of whether liability was conceded in relation to
14 the payment. The list should be inclusive of all payments made regardless of whether the
15
payment was made in response to court order, arbitration proceeding or voluntarily by the
16
17 electric corporation. For each claim paid include a complete description of the events
18 surrounding the fire, inclusive of the cause, date, location, and type of damages that resulted
19 from the fire and whether the fire resulted in the loss of human life. The WMP filing should also
20 describe all remediation and/or rehabilitation efforts (and cost thereof) made after the fire by the
21
electric corporation to rectify the damages caused by the fire. For any damages paid that did not
22
23 compensate the victim for 100% of its damages, please identify the percentage of the total
24 damages caused by the fire that were, in fact, compensated by the electric corporation.
25
26
COMMENTS OF POTLATCHDELTIC CORPORATION ON STAFF'S APPLICATION FOR A WILDFIRE
27 MITIGATION PLAN FILING PROCESS
GN R-E-25-02
28
PAGE 7

1 4. Staffs Proposed Schedule is too Aggressive
2 The ability of Idahoans who are harmed by wildfires to recover their damages is on the
3
chopping block in this docket. A hurried decision that does not thoroughly and comprehensively
4
5
balance the risks and costs of granting immunity to utilities for wildfire damages (including loss
6 of life and livelihoods) can cause immeasurable, permanent and uncompensated harm. Despite
7 the fact that the economic and human toll of an error in judgment by the Commission could be
8 devastating, the Act only allows the PUC six months from the date a WMP is filed to issue its
9
order approving or rejecting the plan. The time constraints imposed by the legislation clearly do
10
I
not comprehend all that is entailed in a contested case before the Commission. Contested cases
12 typically take the Commission at least nine months to resolve. They involve such time-
13 consuming activities as gathering evidence (production requests, responses and follow-up
14 discovery requests) drafting and filing direct testimony drafting and filing rebuttal testimony,
15
drafting and filing surrebuttal testimony, evidentiary hearings, public witness hearings, post-
16
17 hearing briefs, Commission deliberations and order drafting. the issuance of a final order,
18 requests for reconsideration, and orders on reconsideration. (See Idaho Code Section 61-622.) It
19 is, indeed, an enormous task the legislature has saddled the Commission with—only six months
20 in which to resolve the issues, (many of which may be contested and some of which are sure to
21
be controversial), and then issue a thoughtful, deliberate order. On top of that, all of this is in a
22
23 subject matter arena in which neither the Commission nor its Staff have had any prior
24 experience.
25
26
COMMENTS OF POTLATCHDELTIC CORPORATION ON STAFF'S APPLICATION FOR A WILDFIRE
27 MITIGATION PLAN FILING PROCESS
GN R-E-25-02
28
PAGE 8

I With all of the above in mind, it is facially unreasonable for the Commission to entertain
2 more than one WMP at a time—especially with the limited staff and resources available to it.
3
The timeframes outlined in the Staffs Application are therefore unreasonable and unrealistic.
4
5
PotlatchDeltic recommends the Commission entertain the WMP filing from one of the larger
6 electric utilities first and then, one at a time, entertain WMP filings from other large electric
7 utilities.? This way the Commission will gain the expertise and experience necessary to more
8 effectively and efficiently evaluate subsequent plans and possibly accelerate the review process
9
with sufficient time and experience.
10
I Based on the foregoing, PotlatchDeltic recommends the Commission reject all of the
12 Staff s proposed filing dates in anticipation of entertaining its first WMP filing no earlier than
13 January 1, 2026, which is only six months after the legislation became law. Given that this
14 legislation is novel and the Commission will have to retain and train Staff experts to evaluate
15
WMPs, a six-month window to do so is inherently reasonable.
16
17 WHEREFORE: PotlatchDeltic respectfully requests the Commission incorporate the
18 above comments and recommendations relative to (1) the inputs to an appropriate balancing test,
19 (2) the `mandatory' nature of the list of preventative measures, (3) incorporation of a compete
20 understanding of the current ratepayer burden, or lack thereof, in paying their fair share of
21
wildfire mitigation costs, (4) rejecting Staffs proposed filing dates and only entertain WMPs on
22
23
24
25
26 7 Section 61-1802(2)(a)provides that the Commission "may order the plans to be filed at a date
determined by it and may stagger filing dates. "
COMMENTS OF POTLATCHDELTIC CORPORATION ON STAFF'S APPLICATION FOR A WILDFIRE
27 MITIGATION PLAN FILING PROCESS
GNR-E-25-02
28
PAGE 9

I at a time, initially from the larger electrical corporations, until sufficient in-house expertise is
2 developed to entertain multiple filings at a time.
3
4
5 Respectfully submitted:
6 n n7 By: _
Peter Richardson
8 Richardson Adams, PLLC
9 Attorneys for PotlatchDeltic Corporation
10
11 Dated this 7t" day of August 2025.
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
COMMENTS OF POTLATCHDELTIC CORPORATION ON STAFF'S APPLICATION FOR A WILDFIRE
27 MITIGATION PLAN FILING PROCESS
GNR-E-25-02
28
PAGE 10

1
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on the 71h day of August 2025, a true and correct copy of the within
2 and foregoing PETITION TO INTERVENE of POTLATCHDELTIC CORPORATION was
3 served by electronic copy only, to:
4 Rocky Mountain Power
Idaho Public Utilities Commission Joe Dallas
5 Adam Triplett 825 NE Multnomah, Ste. 2000
6 Deputy Attorney General Portland, OR 97232
PO Box 83720 joseph.dallas ,,(eb
7 Boise, Id 83720-0074 datarequest cr pacificorp.com
secretMfa),puc.idaho.gov. Mark Adler
8 adam.hiplett a uc.idaho.gov Rocky Mountain Power
9 Monica Barrios-Sanches 1407 W. N. Temple, Ste. 330
Commission Secretary Salt Lake City, UT 84116
10 Idaho Public Utilities Commission mark.alder(&,,pacificporL.com
11 Monica.bariossanchesi a.;puc.Idaho.gov
12 Kootenai Electric Cooperative, Inc. Avista Utilities
Michael G. Andrea, Esq. Anni Glogovac, Counsel for
13 Thomas Maddalone Regulatory Affairs
9015 W. Lancaster Rd Elizabeth Andrews, Sr. Manager
l4 Rathdrum, ID 83858 of Revenue Requirements
15 mandrea a kec.com PO Box 3727
tmaddalone(kec.com 1411 E. Mission Ave, MSC 27
16 anni.glo og vac(a-)avistacorp.com
17 liz.andrews(@avistacorp.com
18 USTelcom—The Broadband Association Idaho Department of Lands
B. Lynn Follansbee, VP Strategic Initiatives J.J. Winters, Attorney
19 Kathleen Slattery Thompson, VP Reg. & Legal Tyre Holfeltz, Wildfire Risk
20 601 New Jersey Avenue NW, Ste. 600 300 N. 6" St., Ste. 103
Washington, DC 20001 Boise, ID 83702
21 ksthompson(Lustelecom.org jwintersgidl.idaho gov
Ifollansbee(&stelecom.org tolfeltz c&r ida.idaho.gov
22
23
24
25
26
COMMENTS OF POTLATCHDELTIC CORPORATION ON STAFF'S APPLICATION FOR A WILDFIRE
27 MITIGATION PLAN FILING PROCESS
GNR-E-25-02
28
PAGE 1 l

I Idaho Power Company City of Idaho Falls
PO Box 70 Idaho Falls Power
2 Boise, Idaho 83707 Stephen Boorman,
3 Megan Goicoechea Allen Interim General Manager
Donovan E. Walker PO Box 50220
4 Lisa C. Lance 140 S. Capital Ave.
Tim Tatum Idaho Falls Idaho 83402
5 Riley Maloney sboorman"(eifpower.org
6 Connie Aschenbrenner
mgoicoecheaallenLaNdahopower.com City of Idaho Falls
7 dwalker(a idahopower.com Idaho Falls Power
llance(i dahopower.com Michael A. Kirkham,
8 docket$ct�,idahopower.com City Attorney
9 ttatumAidahopower.com 375 "D" Street
rmaloney( idahopower.com Idaho Falls, Idaho 83402
10 caschenbrenner Li�idahopower.com mkirkham&fpower ov_
I I Bennett Lumber Products, Inc. Atlanta Power Company
12 Idaho Forest Group Nick Jones
Manulife Investment Management 325 W. Yuba Vista Drive
13 Molpus Woodlands Group Atlanta, ID 83716
14 Stimson Lumber Company atlantapower23r�outlook.com
c/o Pendrey P. Trammell
15 Smith& Malek, PLLC Atlanta Power Company
601 E. Front Ave., Ste. 304 Production Request Address
16 Coer d' Alene, ID 83814 PO Box 710
CIA i�:c a smilhmalak.com Meridian, ID 83680
I atlantapower21(1 outlook.com
18 CTIA
Matthew DeTura, Counsel for External Affairs
19 Benjamin Aron, Asstant VP State Regulatory
1400 16t" Street NW, Ste. 600
20 Washington, DC 20036
21 mdetura(u)clia.org
baron c(�7- ctia.orti
22
23
y: eter J. Richardson ISB # 3195
24
25
26
COMMENTS OF POTLATCHDELTIC CORPORATION ON STAFF'S APPLICATION FOR A WILDFIRE
27 MITIGATION PLAN FILING PROCESS
GNR-E-25-02
28
PAGE 12