20260213Objection to Petition to Intervene.pdf

Sonyalee R. Nutsch, ISB #6189 RECEIVED
snutsch cr,clbrmc.com FEBRUARY 12, 2026
CLEMENTS, BROWN & McNICHOLS, P.A. IDAHO PUBLIC
321 13th Street UTILITIES COMMISSION
Post Office Box 1510
Lewiston, Idaho 83501
[phone]
[phone] Facsimile
Attorneys for Clearwater Power Company
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF CLEARWATER ) Case No. CO I-E-26-01
POWER COMPANY'S 2026 WILDFIRE )
MITIGATION PLAN ) OBJECTION TO PETITION TO
INTERVENE BY
POTLATCHDELTIC FOREST
HOLDINGS, INC.
Clearwater Power Company ("Clearwater"), by and through its attorney of record,
Sonyalee R. Nutsch of the firm Clements, Brown & McNichols, P.A., hereby responds and
objects to the Petition to Intervene by PotlatchDeltic Forest Holdings, Inc. ("Potlatch").
As explained below, granting Potlatch's Petition to Intervene will unduly broaden the
issues and unnecessarily delay Clearwater's obtaining approval of its Wildfire Mitigation
Plan("WMP"). In addition, allowing Potlatch to intervene is unnecessary since Clearwater
has agreed to provide notice and an opportunity to comment on Clearwater's proposed WMP
in accordance with Idaho Code § 61-1804( 2).
OBJECTION TO PETITION TO
INTERVENE BY POTLATCHDELTIC
FOREST HOLDINGS, INC. —1—

L BACKGROUND
Clearwater is an Idaho non-profit, member-owned, electric cooperative, with its
primary office located in Lewiston, Idaho. In the 2025 legislative session, the Idaho
Legislature enacted the Wildfire Standard of Care Act. 2025 Idaho Sess. Laws Ch. 249(S.B.
1183) (the "Act"). The Act, among other things, allows electric cooperatives that are not
public utilities to adopt and file wildfire mitigation plans with the Idaho Public Utilities
Commission ("Commission"). See I. C.§61-1803(2)(b). The Commission is required to
approve or reject each plan within six (6)months of the date it is filed with the Commission.
See I.C. § 61-1804(1).
In Order No, 36774 and related Errata Order No. 36774, the Commission adopted a
schedule for filing the plans. Pursuant to that schedule, Clearwater was authorized to file its
WMP on or after January 1, 2026.
The Act sets forth the elements that are required to be included in each WMP. See
I.C.§ 61-1803(3). Each plan is to identify a means for mitigating wildfire risk that reflects a
reasonable balancing of mitigation costs with the resulting reduction of wildfire risk See id.
In Order No. 36774 and related Errata Order No. 36774, the Commission adopted Wildfire
Mitigation Plan Guidelines(" Guidelines")regarding the content of wildfire mitigation plans.
In accordance with the Act, the Commission also Ordered that certain interested parties must
be given notice that must include information on how to participate in the Commission's
proceedings. Based on communication from Commission staff received prior to Potlatch's
Petition to Intervene, Clearwater agreed to voluntarily provide Potlatch with such notice,
OBJECTION TO PETITION TO
INTERVENE BY POTLATCHDELTIC
FOREST HOLDINGS, INC. —2—

thus giving it an opportunity to be heard by the Commission. This Notice has recently been
sent. (See Declaration of Sonyalee R. Nutsch, 2/12/2026, Exh. A).
II. ARGUMENT
A. Allowing Potlatch to Intervene Will Unduly Broaden the Issues and Prejudice
Clearwater
After Clearwater submitted its WMP to the Commission, on February 5, 2026,
Potlatch filed a Petition to Intervene in this matter. In its Petition,Potlatch specifically stated
"[t]his Intervenor intends to participate herein as a party, and if necessary, to introduce
evidence, cross-examine witnesses, call and examine witnesses, and be heard in argument..."
(Petition to Int. p.3). Despite this, Potlatch also claims that "[g[ranting this Intervenor's
petition to intervene will not unduly broaden the issues nor will it prejudice any party to this
case."Id.
Pursuant to IDAPA 3.01.01.074, intervention can be granted if it "does not unduly
broaden the issues..." There is no question that Potlatch's request to essentially turn the
review and approval of a WMP into a contested legal proceeding where evidence and
witnesses will be introduced, will unduly broaden the issues. The process contemplated by
the Idaho legislature in the Act was not to turn the review and approval of a WMP into
lengthy and costly litigation for non-profit electric Cooperatives throughout the state of
Idaho. Doing so would be very prejudicial to Clearwater and all of its members who would
have to bear this cost. The Commission is fully equipped to gather and review the
information required by the Act to determine if Clearwater's WMP is compliant. Potlatch's
desire to turn this process into more that was ever contemplated by the Idaho legislature
OBJECTION TO PETITION TO
INTERVENE BY POTLATCHDELTIC
FOREST HOLDINGS, INC. —3—

should not be allowed and, as explained below, is unnecessary.
B. Intervention is Unnecessary Because Potlatch Has Been Provided the Notice
and Opportunity to be Heard
In its Petition, Potlatch claimed that "[w]ithout the opportunity to intervene herein,
this Intervenor would be without any means of participation in this proceeding..."(Petition
to Int. p.3). This simply is not the case. As stated above, in accordance with the Act, the
Commission also Ordered that certain interested parties must be given notice that must
include information on how to participate in the Commission's proceedings. Based on
communication from Commission staff, Clearwater agreed to voluntarily provide Potlatch
with such notice, giving them an opportunity to be heard by the Commission. This Notice
has recently been sent. (See Nutsch Decl. at Exh. A). Because Potlatch does have the same
means as all other interested parties in this matter to be heard, allowing it to intervene as a
"party" is not necessary.
III. CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing, Clearwater respectfully requests that the Commission
deny Potlatch's Petition to Intervene as a party in this matter.
DATED this 12' day of February 2026.
CLEMENTS, BROWN & McNICHOLS, P.A.
By
`7K
SONYALEE R. NUTSCH
Attorney for Clearwater Power Company
OBJECTION TO PETITION TO
INTERVENE BY POTLATCHDELTIC
FOREST HOLDINGS, INC. —4—

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on the 12t1i day of February 2026 I caused to be served a true and
correct copy of foregoing by the methods indicated below, and addressed to the following:
Monica Barrios-Sanches [ ] U.S. MAIL
Commission Secretary [X] ELECTRONIC MAIL
IPUC [ ] FACSIMILE:
P.O. Box 83720 [ ] HAND DELIVERED
Boise, Idaho 83720
secretary(a,puc.Idaho.gov
monica.barriossanches(a»puc.idaho.gov
Peter J. Richardson [ ] U.S. MAIL
515 N. 27' Street [X] ELECTRONIC MAIL
Boise, Idaho 83702 [ ] FACSIMILE:
peter(c�richardsonadams.com [ ] HAND DELIVERED
PotlatchDeltic Forest Holdings, Inc. [ ] U.S. MAIL
Attn: Michele Tyler, Esq. [X] ELECTRONIC MAIL
Wade Semeliss [ ] FACSIMILE:
Brian Schlect, Esq. [ ] HAND DELIVERED
Anna Torma
601 W. First Ave. Ste. 1600 9
Spokane, WA 99201
michele.taylergpotlatchdeltic.com
Brian.schlect(apotlatchdeltic.com
wade.semelissgpotlatchdeltic.com
anna.torma(apotlatchdeltic.com
SONYALEE R. NUTSCH
OBJECTION TO PETITION TO
INTERVENE BY POTLATCHDELTIC
FOREST HOLDINGS, INC. —5—