20250807Joint Comments.pdf

-Ral—
mq% Ro
MEGAN GOICOECHEA ALLEN RECEIVED
Corporate Counsel August 7, 2025
mgoicoecheaallen6a�idahopower.com
IDAHO PUBLIC
UTILITIES COMMISSION
August 7, 2025
VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
Commission Secretary
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
11331 West Chinden Blvd., Building 8
Suite 201-A
Boise, Idaho 83714
Re: Case No. GNR-E-25-02
Commission Staff's Application for Approval of a Filing Process for Wildfire
Mitigation Plans
Dear Commission Secretary:
Attached for electronic filing are Joint Utility Comments in the above-entitled matter.
If you have any questions about the attached comments, please do not hesitate to
contact me.
Very truly yours, nn����^^ -
n I I l
Megan Goicoechea Allen
MGA:sg
Enclosures
1221 W. Idaho St(83702)
P.O. Box 70
Boise, ID 83707

MEGAN GOICOECHEA ALLEN (ISB No. JOE DALLAS (ISB No. 10330)
7623) PacifiCorp
Idaho Power Company 825 NE Multnomah Street
1221 West Idaho Street (83702) Suite 2000
P.O. Box 70 Portland, Oregon 97232
Boise, Idaho 83707 Telephone: [phone]
Telephone: [phone] [e-mail]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]
Attorney for Rocky Mountain Power
Attorney for Idaho Power Company
ANNI GLOGOVAC, PRO HAC VICE
COUNSEL
Avista Corporation
1411 E. Mission Avenue
P.O. Box 3727
Spokane, Washington 99220
Telephone: [phone]
[e-mail]
Attorney for Avista Corporation
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF COMMISSION )
STAFF'S APPLICATION FOR ) CASE NO. GNR-E-25-02
APPROVAL OF A FILING PROCESS )
FOR WILDFIRE MITIGATION PLANS ) JOINT UTILITY COMMENTS
COMES NOW, Avista Corporation, dba Avista Utilities, Idaho Power Company,
and PacifiCorp dba Rocky Mountain Power (collectively referred to as the "Joint Utilities"),
in accordance with the Idaho Public Utilities Commission's ("Commission") Rules of
Procedure 201-204, and the Notice of Modified Procedure in this matter, Order No.
36686, hereby respectfully submits the following Joint Comments.
JOINT UTILITY COMMENTS - 1

I. BACKGROUND
1. On June 18, 2025, Commission Staff ("Staff") submitted an application to
the Commission requesting that the Commission issue an order establishing a filing
process for Wildfire Mitigation Plans ("WMPs") that will be submitted for approval under
the Wildfire Standard of Care Act ("WSCA"), which went into effect on July 1, 2025. The
WSCA, codified as Idaho Code, Title 61, Chapter 18, requires the Commission to review
and approve or reject annual WMPs within six months of submittal, ensuring the minimum
requirements of Idaho Code §61-1803 are met, while also considering: 1) the consistency
of the plan with the public health, safety, and welfare, 2) the feasibility of the plan and the
cost of its implementation, and 3) the degree to which the plan adequately minimizes
wildfire risk and proposes to respond to wildfires that do occur.' Idaho Code §61-1804.
Additionally, as part of the application submitted on June 18, 2025, Staff signaled its intent
to file a supplemental document on July 10, 2025, to include: 1) Staff's proposed
guidelines outlining additional minimum requirements to be included within WMPs, and
2) Staff's proposed "Need to Know Document"for electric municipalities and cooperatives
to file with the Commission to aid in Staff's review of each respective WMP.2
2. Also submitted on June 18, 2025, Staff filed a motion proposing staggered
filing dates for electric utilities' WMPs to allow for a regulatory process to be developed
as part of this docket, including a discussion regarding the annual review of WMPs, the
components to be included within a WMP and its associated compliance report pursuant
to Idaho Code §61-1803(3-5), and other recommendations such as investor-owned
utilities meeting with the Commission for annual updates.
' Staff s Application for a Wildfire Mitigation Plan Filing Process,page 3.
'-Id.,page 5
JOINT UTILITY COMMENTS - 2

3. On June 30, 2025, Staff hosted a workshop with electric utilities to discuss
the application submitted on June 18, 2025, as well as a draft of Staff's proposed WMP
guidelines, compliance reports, filing dates, Commission review, and handling of WMP
costs. Following this workshop, the Joint Utilities submitted feedback to Staff regarding
certain proposals that were discussed.
4. On July 10, 2025, Staff submitted a supplement to the application submitted
on June 18, 2025, ("Staff's Supplemental Filing") to propose "Commission WMP
Guidelines" pursuant to the minimum requirements in Idaho Code §61-1803(3)(a)(g) and
the proposed "Need to Know Document" for electric municipalities and cooperatives to
file with each WMP.3 Moreover, Staff's Supplemental Filing requests that the Commission
require each utility to include Staff's recommended components, some of which reflect
feedback from the Joint Utilities, within their respective WMPs, as outlined in the
accompanying Exhibit No. 1. Staff's Supplemental Filing also discussed rolling WMPs,
additional components to include within a WMP, amendments to WMPs, and compliance
reports.
II. JOINT UTILITY COMMENTS
5. While largely supportive of the recommendations set forth in Staff's original
and supplemental filings, the Joint Utilities appreciate the opportunity to offer these
comments to respond to and address those aspects of Staff's proposals where
adjustment, expansion, or clarification is warranted as more fully described below.
3 Staff s Supplement to Application,page 1.
JOINT UTILITY COMMENTS - 3

A. Staff Proposal No. 5 Requiring Each Compliance Report to Identify Monthly
Targets with Estimated Costs and Monthly Actuals with Actual Costs for
Measurable Targets, Goals, and Metrics for Components of its WMP,
Explaining Where Each Component Within the Compliance Report Ties to its
Approved WMP.
6. The Joint Utilities understand Staff's desire for each utility to identify monthly
targeted and estimated costs and connecting each of these metrics within the annual
compliance report to the most recently approved WMP. However, many mitigation
initiatives undertaken in a WMP are multi-month undertakings with constant variability
over the course of a given year. Factors that lead to this variability include but are not
limited to construction and permitting timelines, contractor availability, seasonal access,
and operational prioritization. WMPs have historically set targets at an annual level as
opposed to monthly targets, providing a more accurate representation of what will be
accomplished in each timeframe. The Joint Utilities are concerned that a requirement to
include monthly targets would create unnecessary risk for the Joint Utilities by artificially
making it appear that a utility is out of compliance with their Commission-approved WMP,
including the figures stated therein, and therefore jeopardizing the liability protections
afforded to a Commission-approved WMP by Idaho Code. Accordingly, the Joint Utilities
instead propose that compliance reports focus specifically on annual targets, which best
align with a WMP's overall objective— identifying and implementing wildfire risk measures
throughout a plan's cycle and, more specifically, during each of the years therein. If Staff
wishes to review monthly results of each utility's wildfire mitigation efforts, that data could
be separately provided with the understanding that, aside from merely being a part of an
overall total, the individual figures would not be associated with specific monthly targets
outlined in a WMP.
JOINT UTILITY COMMENTS -4

B. Staff Proposal No. 8 Requiring Each Electric Utility's Notice to Interested
Entities to Include Information About How to Participate in the Commission's
Proceeding, the Case Number, and Provide a Copy of the Notice to the
Commission in its Filing.
7. The Joint Utilities are supportive of Staff's proposal and, more specifically,
that each utility's notice to interested entities should include information about how such
entities can participate in the Commission's proceeding. The Joint Utilities believe that
informing interested entities of their respective WMP's submission to the Commission is
an important way to encourage feedback that can support the continued development of
each utility's WMP over time. Additionally, directing that such feedback be submitted
within the applicable utility docket will help create a more complete record for the
Commission and all stakeholders' review and consideration.
C. Staff Proposal No. 9 Requiring Each WMP to Represent at a Minimum a
Three-year Rolling Plan.
8. Staff believes it is important to have a rolling WMP as it shows the
projections of mitigation efforts and estimated expenditures over an extended period of
time.' Accordingly, Staff has proposed that each WMP represent at a minimum a three-
year rolling plan to allow Staff to review the projected expenses for multiple years as the
plan is implemented. In support of this approach, Staff points to Commission Orders
wherein the cadence of WMP filings or forecasts in support thereof for each of the Joint
Utilities have been discussed.5 Notably, however, these Commission Orders do not
specifically contemplate a rolling three-year cycle of any of the Joint Utilities' WMPs.
'Id., page 3.
5 See generally,Order No. 36042,TPC-E-23-11,Order No.36405,PAC-E-24-09, and Order No. 35909, AVU-E-23-
01.
JOINT UTILITY COMMENTS - 5

9. The Joint Utilities are aligned with Staff's proposal to submit multi-year
WMPs to demonstrate the evolution of mitigation efforts and expenditures. However, the
Joint Utilities believe a static planning cycle is the most effective approach and propose
that the calendar years within these multi-year WMPs remain fixed, as exemplified in
Table 1 below. Updates to intervening years would occur during annual WMP update
filings. The Commission's approval should similarly follow a calendar year basis, applying
retroactively to the beginning of each calendar year.
Table 1: Proposed WMP Planning Cycle
Inaugural WMP Filed WMP Update Filed WIMP Update Filed Inaugural WMP Filed
in Fall 2025 in Fall 2026 in Fall 2027 in Fall 2028
Covers 2026-2028 Covers 2027-2028 Covers 2028 Covers 2029-2031
10. This static approach allows Staff to review annual projections for multiple
years while aligning with typical annual planning and budgeting processes. It also avoids
the administrative complexities and operational uncertainties of a rolling plan while still
ensuring that each utility's wildfire mitigation efforts are adequately detailed.
11. If the Commission decides to pursue a rolling three-year plan, the Joint
Utilities have significant concerns. While the Joint Utilities understand the desire for a
flexible and responsive planning process, a rolling plan introduces a potentially
unacceptable level of ambiguity that could ultimately hinder effective wildfire mitigation
efforts and create a significant administrative burden.
12. The current lack of precedent for a rolling three-year plan in our regulatory
environment reflects the inherent complexities and risks that such type of plan presents.
If a rolling three-year plan is ultimately required, the Joint Utilities urge the Commission
to provide a clear framework for how compliance will be measured and how conflicts
JOINT UTILITY COMMENTS - 6

between different versions of the WMP will be resolved. Of critical importance requiring
resolution:
• Confusion Over Compliance Standards: A rolling plan creates a "pancaking
effect" where multiple versions of the WMP can exist simultaneously. This raises
the critical question of which WMP is the definitive standard for a given year. If a
new plan is filed with updated targets but an earlier plan covering the same year
has already been approved, which set of targets should the utility pursue? This
ambiguity makes it nearly impossible to consistently track progress and could lead
to disputes over performance metrics.
• Hindered Investment and Planning: Wildfire mitigation efforts require long-term
capital investments. A rolling plan introduces instability that could jeopardize these
projects. A multi-year project approved in one WMP cycle could be put on hold or
canceled if a subsequent filing is denied. This stop-and-start planning is not only
inefficient but also undermines the stable, long-term commitment needed for
effective risk reduction.
• Increased Administrative and Regulatory Burden: The logistical challenge of
managing multiple WMP versions would be immense for both utilities and Staff.
Tracking compliance would require reviewing an ever-growing stack of documents,
which would increase working hours and costs for all parties.
13. The Joint Utilities ask the Commission to consider these potential pitfalls
and, if a static planning cycle as proposed above is not adopted, at a minimum, provide
clear guidance on how to navigate the potential ambiguity of Staff's proposed cycle of
rolling three-year plans.
JOINT UTILITY COMMENTS - 7

D. Staff Proposal No. 11 Accepting Exhibit No. 1 as the Commission's WMP
Guidelines for Each Electric Corporation's WMP Filings.
14. While the Joint Utilities are generally supportive of the content and
requirements included within Exhibit No. 1 of Staff's Supplemental Filing, some minor
refinement and restructuring is needed in a few areas. To this end, the Joint Utilities
request that the discussion surrounding de-energization not include requested de-
energizations by first responders or occurrences where a planned de-energization occurs
for maintenance, circuit hardening or activities of a similar nature which, although may be
part of a utility's broader wildfire mitigation efforts, should be considered standard
operational practices. Additionally, in explaining how recommendations from other
federal, state, and county agencies were considered in developing each of the Joint
Utilities' vegetation management standards, it is important to acknowledge that the Joint
Utilities operate within the constraints of specific easements or right-of-way and are
required to comply with National Electrical Safety Code standards. Accordingly, the Joint
Utilities recommend that this explanation be limited to only recommendations from these
agencies relating to surface fuels, fuel reduction, or fuels adjacent to infrastructure.
15. The Joint Utilities also recommend that the requirements contained in
Staff's Supplemental Filing Exhibit No. 1 be enumerated in a manner consistent with the
subsections of Idaho Code §61-1803(3), particularly with regard to the section labeled
"Preventative Actions and Programs." Staff's Proposal would duplicate a number of
different mitigation efforts that the Legislature separately identified with the subsections
of Idaho Code §61-1803(3). Restructuring Staff's proposal regarding "Preventative
Actions and Programs" will better enable each utility's WMP to more easily facially
demonstrate compliance with the requirements of the WSCA, reduce the potential for
JOINT UTILITY COMMENTS - 8

confusion as to what exact action the utility plans to take as part of a given effort, and
appropriately reflects the likely intent of the legislature in drafting the WSCA - namely,
that the identification of "preventative actions and programs" was intended to have
independent meaning distinct from the mitigations such as "standards, procedures, and
schedules" related to asset inspections, power line de-energization, and vegetation
management, as evidenced by Idaho Code §61-1803(3)'s separate listing of these
elements. As such, the Commission's requirements for Preventative Actions and
Programs should not include any mitigations that already are encompassed by the other
subsections of Idaho Code §61-1803(3).
16. Finally, the Joint Utilities raise concern with Staff's "least cost, least risk"
formulation in analyzing selected methods of line design. This language does not appear
in Idaho Code §61-1803(3)(e). To the extent that Staff's formulation would exceed or
impose additional restrictions beyond the reasonable balancing of mitigation cost versus
mitigation benefit mandated by the WSCA, the Joint Utilities oppose the insertion of a
"least cost, least risk" mitigation selection requirement.
E. Staff Proposal No. 13 Order That Any Amendments to WMPs Would Not Have
Retroactive Approval.
17. The Joint Utilities disagree with Staff's proposal that amendments to WMPs
should not have retroactive effect, specifically as it pertains to the operational realities of
executing a WMP or maintaining the ability to be innovative throughout a WMP's plan
year while simultaneously complying with the WSCA and being eligible for the liability
benefit contained therein. The Joint Utilities should be encouraged to act swiftly when
real-time circumstances dictate as much, or to reduce wildfire risk if a more efficient or
cost-effective approach is identified after a WMP is approved, as opposed to waiting until
JOINT UTILITY COMMENTS - 9

a subsequent year's submission to incorporate new information or approaches into the
plan. Absent an opportunity to amend a WMP, which would still be subject to the
Commission's review and approval, the WSCA actually encourages delay in innovation
or efficiency through the incentive to not compromise the liability protections afforded
through a utility's strict adherence with a Commission-approved WMP.
F. Staff Proposal No. 14 Requiring the Electric Corporation to File its
Compliance Report One-year and 60 Days After its WMP is Approved,
Detailing its Compliance with its Previously Approved WMP in the Docket
that Approved its WMP.
18. The Joint Utilities appreciate Staff's understanding of the timing concerns
previously raised regarding Staff's originally proposed timeframe for submitting annual
compliance reports. While the Joint Utilities acknowledge Staff's most recently proposed
timeframe of when a compliance report is to be submitted generally resolves the concerns
previously raised, a compliance report's deadline being tied to when that year's WMP was
approved creates the potential for unnecessary variability in these annual reports' due
dates. As such, the Joint Utilities instead recommend that compliance reports be
submitted on a staggered basis with due dates being the first day of April, May, and June
of each year for Idaho Power Company, Rocky Mountain Power, and Avista Corporation,
respectively, and consist only of WMP results from the prior calendar year, thereby
aligning with the proposed timeframe in which each approved WMP would be in effect.
G. Staff Proposal No. 15 Requiring Electric Utilities Provide a Compliance
Status Update with its Annual WMP Filing, Detailing its Compliance and
Updates on Meeting its Measurable Targets/Goals to Help Inform Any
Changes to its New WMP.
19. While the Joint Utilities support Staff's recommendation that each annual
WMP filing include a status update on progress toward the measurable targets and goals
set forth in their most recently approved WMP, the Joint Utilities emphasize that, given
JOINT UTILITY COMMENTS - 10

the timing of when these status updates are likely to be prepared, several amounts may
rely upon forecasted components until the conclusion of wildfire season. If Staff prefers
that only known and measurable amounts as of the preparation of each WMP be provided
as part of this status update, the Joint Utilities respectfully request that this requirement
be modified accordingly.
H. Staff Proposal No. 16 Requiring That Each Compliance Report Contain a List
of Any Fire That Occurred Within '/4 Mile of the Utility's Infrastructure or Any
Fire That Has Burned Into the Utility's Infrastructure During the Compliance
Year, Explaining Any Unofficial or Official Reported Causes of Ignition For
the Fire, the Approximate Location of the Start of the Fire, and if There Was
Any Damage to Company Infrastructure, Structures, Property or Any
Persons.
20. Although the Joint Utilities appreciate Staff having modified this requirement
from the proposal originally put forth,6 the revised proposal's current form still results in
an overly broad and burdensome requirement. Specifically, the Joint Utilities are unclear
if this proposed requirement not being limited to areas of heightened wildfire risk intends
to help Staff identify asset vulnerability, customer impact or some other metric, which
makes trying to provide the information in a useful manner challenging. Moreover, a
requirement to report all official causes of fires that occurred within a '/4 mile of a utility's
infrastructure would necessitate a utility having to file a public records request for each
occurrence, assuming the lead investigative agency is even known and willing to release
their report. More problematic, however, is the requirement for the Joint Utilities to
determine what qualifies as an "unofficial" cause of such fires - an exercise that would
amount to speculation and could involve disclosing information that investigative agencies
prefer not be made public.
'Staff s Supplement to Application,page 4.
JOINT UTILITY COMMENTS - 11

21. In the alternative, the Joint Utilities propose modifying this requirement to
limit reporting obligations to only those fires that burned more than 1 acre, are either
known to the utility or reported by the National Interagency Fire Center, and that occur
within a heightened wildfire risk area and within '/4 mile of a utility's infrastructure during
the compliance year, and to include only those causes that are publicly available through
the National Interagency Fire Center as of the date of the compliance report's compilation.
I. Other
22. Although not contemplated within Staff's recommendations, Idaho Code
§61-1803(3)(g)(iii) requires that landowners be compensated at fair market value if live
marketable timber is identified for removal from timber company land adjacent to an
electric corporation's right-of-way. Given the potential cost recovery and rate impact
concerns associated with the uncertainty of this requirement, the Joint Utilities believe
that clarifying how "fair market value" is to be determined would help reduce future
confusion and potential landowner frustration. Additionally, the Joint Utilities believe that
collaboration among all stakeholders to develop or identify either a working list of timber
companies or a centralized resource that maps timber company land would be a valuable
tool in supporting compliance with this requirement.
III. CONCLUSION
23. The Joint Utilities appreciate the extensive work by Staff to develop the
proposed filing process and WMP guidelines contained within Staff's application
establishing this docket as well as Staff's Supplemental Filing. Apart from the adjustments
noted above, the Joint Utilities believe that Staff's proposed WMP requirements provide
a reasonable framework to support an efficient regulatory process, facilitate operational
JOINT UTILITY COMMENTS - 12

readiness to execute upon the components of each utility's respective WMP, and ensure
compliance with the requirements of the WSCA. Accordingly, the Joint Utilities
respectfully request that the Commission adopt Staff's proposed WMP requirements,
subject to the above-stated modifications, and look forward to continued collaboration
with Staff and other stakeholders as WMPs continue to evolve.
DATED at Boise, Idaho this Th day of August 2025.
U% I W�uq
MEGAN GOICOECHEA ALLEN
Attorney for Idaho Power Company
(Awy��9�
ANNI GLOGOVAC
Attorney for Avista Corporation
JOE DALLAS
Attorney for PacifiCorp
JOINT UTILITY COMMENTS - 13

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on the 7t" day of August 2025 1 served a true and correct
copy of Joint Utility Comments upon the following named parties by the method indicated
below, and addressed to the following:
Commission Staff Hand Delivered
Adam Triplett U.S. Mail
Deputy Attorney General Overnight Mail
Idaho Public Utilities Commission FAX
472 West Washington (83702) X Email adam.triplett(abpuc.idaho.gov
P.O. Box 83720
Boise, Idaho 83720-0074
Avista Corp. Hand Delivered
Anni Glogovac U.S. Mail
Elizabeth Andrews Overnight Mail
Avista Corporation FAX
P.O. Box 3727 X Email
1411 East Mission Avenue anni.glogovac(a)avistacorp.com
Spokane, WA 99220-3727 Liz.and rews(a�avistacorp.com
[e-mail]
Bennett Lumber Products, Inc. Hand Delivered
Idaho Forest Group U.S. Mail
Manulife Investment Management Overnight Mail
Molpus Woodlands Group FAX
Stimson Lumber Company X Email service(a-)-smithmalek.com
c/o Pendrey P. Trammell
Smith & Malek, PLLC
601 E. Front Ave., Ste. 304
Coeur d' Alene, ID 83814
City of Idaho Falls Hand Delivered
Michael Kirkham U.S. Mail
City Attorney Overnight Mail
375 D. Street FAX
Idaho Falls, Idaho 83401 X Email [e-mail]
JOINT UTILITY COMMENTS - 14

Stephen Boorman Hand Delivered
City of Idaho Falls, Idaho — Idaho Falls U.S. Mail
Power Overnight Mail
P.O. Box 50220 FAX
140 S. Capital Avenue X Email sboorman(ja�ifpower.org
Idaho Falls, Idaho 83402
Idaho Department of Lands Hand Delivered
J.J. Winters U.S. Mail
Idaho Department of Lands Overnight Mail
300 N. 6th Street, Ste. 103 FAX
Boise, Idaho 83702 X Email iwinters(c�idl.idaho.gov
Tyre Holfeltz Hand Delivered
Idaho Department of Lands U.S. Mail
Wildfire Risk Mitigation Program Overnight Mail
Manager FAX
300 N. 6th Street, Ste 103 X Email tholfetz(a)-idl.idaho.gov
Boise, ID 83702
Kootenai Electric Cooperative Hand Delivered
Michael Andrea U.S. Mail
Kootenai Electric Cooperative, Inc. Overnight Mail
9014 W Lancaster Rd FAX
Rathdrum, ID 83858 X Email mandrea(akec.com
Thomas Maddalone Hand Delivered
Kootenai Electric Cooperative U.S. Mail
9014 W. Lancaster Rd. Overnight Mail
Rathdrum, ID 83858 FAX
X Email tmaddalone(a_kec.com
PotlatchDeltic Corporation Hand Delivered
Peter Richardson U.S. Mail
Gregory M. Adams Overnight Mail
Richardson Adams, PLLC FAX
515 N. 27th Street X Email peter richardsonadams.com
Boise, Idaho 83702
JOINT UTILITY COMMENTS - 15

Michele Tyler Hand Delivered
Anna Torma U.S. Mail
Wade Semeliss Overnight Mail
Brian Schlect FAX
PotlatchDeltic Corporation X Email
601 W. First Ave., Ste. 1600 Michele.tyler(a)potlatchdeltic.com
Spokane, WA 99201 Anna.torma(ja�potlatchdeltic.com
Wade.semeliss(cDpotlatchdeltic.com
Brian.schlect(c�potlatchdeltic.com
Jeremy Pisca Hand Delivered
Risch Pisca, PLLC U.S. Mail
407 W. Jefferson Street Overnight Mail
Boise, Idaho 83702 FAX
X Email jpisca rischpisca.com
Rocky Mountain Power Hand Delivered
Joe Dallas U.S. Mail
Rocky Mountain Power Overnight Mail
825 NE Multnomah, Suite 2000 FAX
Portland, OR 97232 X Email Joseph.dallas(a�pacificorp.com
Mark Alder Hand Delivered
Idaho Regulatory Affairs Manager U.S. Mail
Rocky Mountain Power Overnight Mail
1407 West North Temple, Suite 330 FAX
Salt Lake City, Utah 84116 X Email mark.alder(a)_pacificorp.com
Stacy Gust
Regulatory Administrative Assistant
JOINT UTILITY COMMENTS - 16