20260831Response to Petition for Reconsideration.pdf

RECEIVED
August 31, 2026
IDAHO PUBLIC
UTILITIES COMMISSION
JEFFREY R. LOLL
DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL
IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
PO BOX 83720
BOISE, IDAHO 83702
[phone]
IDAHO BAR NO. 11675
Attorney for the Commission Staff
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF AVISTA )
CORPORATION'S APPLICATION FOR ) CASE NO. AVU-E-25-15
APPROVAL OF THE 2026 WILDFIRE )
MITIGATION PLAN )
STAFF'S RESPONSE TO
POTLATCHDELTIC PETITION
FOR RECONSIDERATION
Commission Staff("Staff') of the Idaho Public Utilities Commission ("Commission"),by
and through its attorney of record, Jeff R. Loll, Deputy Attorney General, submits the following
response.
BACKGROUND
On December 9, 2025, Avista Corporation ("Avista" or "Company") applied the
Commission requesting an order approving its 2026 Wildfire Mitigation Plan ("WMP")
("Application"). The Company previously had filed its 2020 WMP, 2023 WMP, and 2024 WMP
with the Commission in various cases for review.I
Additionally, the Company requested the Commission issue an errata to Order No. 36774
aligning the ordering language related to notices under Idaho Code § 61-1804(2) with Staffs
recommendation in Case No. GNR-E-25-02. Application at 6.
' Case No. AVU-E-20-05,2020 WMP filed as part of a request for a deferral for wildfire mitigation expenses. Case
No.AVU-E-23-01,2023 WMP filed as part of a general rate case. Case No.AVU-E-25-01,2024 WMP filed as part
of a general rate case.
STAFF'S RESPONSE TO PETITION
FOR RECONSIDERATION I AUGUST 31, 2026

Lastly, the Company requested the Commission clarify within its order whether the
Company can file its updated WMP for the Commission's annual review on or about November 1
of each year going forward. Application at 8.
On December 22, 2025, the Commission issued an errata to Order No. 36774 in Case No.
GNR-E-25-02, aligning the ordering language to Staff s recommendation about notices.
On January 6, 2026, the Commission issued a Notice of Application and Notice of
Intervention Deadline. Order No. 36901. On January 29, 2026, the Commission granted
intervention to PotlatchDeltic Forest Holdings, LLC. Order No. 36888.
On June 9, 2026,the Commission issued Final Order No. 37064, approving Avista's 2026-
2028 WMP.
On June 30, 2026, PotlatchDeltic Forest Holdings, LLC ("PotlatchDeltic") filed a petition
for reconsideration ("Petition") and separately, Bennett Lumber Products, Inc., Manulife
Investment Management, Molpus Woodlands Group, and Stimson Lumber Company ("Bennett
Lumber et al.") filed a combined petition for reconsideration.
PotlatchDeltic argued that(1)the Commission exceeded the bounds of its authority, (2)the
Commission illegally ignored its obligation to incorporate the recommendation of the Idaho State
Forester, and(3)the Commission arbitrarily and capriciously ignored and disregarded substantial,
competent, and uncontested evidence identifying fatal flaws in Avista's WMP. PotlatchDeltic's
Petition at 3.
Bennett Lumber et al. argued that(1)the Commission failed to consider recommendations
of the Idaho State Forester and failed to make findings that such recommendations were not just,
reasonable, or in the public interest and (2) the Commission has the authority to consider and
implement the May 20, 2026, supplemental recommendations of Idaho Department of Lands
("IDL") and should do so. Bennett Lumber et al. Petition at 3 and 5.
On July 28, 2026, the Commission issued Order No. 37064 granting reconsideration and
set a schedule for supplemental information, Company and Party answer, and petitioner's reply
dates. Order No. 37064 at 2.
On August 11, 2026, PotlatchDeltic filed a response to Order No. 37064, however it did
not provide any supplemental information to its Petition. Bennett Lumber et al. filed supplemental
information for its reconsideration petition, including declarations and two additional
supplemental arguments: (1) IDL's recommendations should be immediately required and
STAFF'S RESPONSE TO PETITION
FOR RECONSIDERATION 2 AUGUST 31, 2026

implemented,and(2)there are specific deficiencies in the 2026 WMP which pose immediate risks.
Bennett Lumber et al.'s Response to Order No. 37064 at 4. Bennett Lumber et al. requests the
Commission reverse its final order and modify its approval of the Company's 2026 WMP so that
it fully incorporates the Idaho State Forester's recommendations as a condition to its approval. Id.
at 7. Alternatively, the party requested the Commission make a finding as to how the WMP in its
current form is "just, reasonable, and in the public interest" as required by Idaho Code section 61-
1804(3). Id.
STAFF ANALYSIS
In this response, Staff responds only to the portions of the Petitions concerning Staff
Comments. Staff appreciates PotlatchDeltic's careful review of the record and welcomes the
opportunity to clarify the intent behind Staff s use of the words "should"and "essential"in certain
sections of the Staff Comments. Staff believes that PotlatchDeltic incorrectly interpreted Staff s
analysis and recommendations. Accordingly, Staff files these comments to clarify the record.
PotlatchDeltic's claims regarding Staffs intent are addressed below. Staff believes Order No.
37064 correctly and adequately considered Staff s comments.
Deficiency Backlog Monitoring
In its Comments, Staff stated the following about monitoring identified deficiencies found
through inspections:
The Company should identify deficiencies through its inspections and other related
activities. Monitoring and correcting inspection deficiencies according to their
respective priority is essential to protect safety and system reliability because a
growing backlog signals that additional resources or process changes are needed to
keep risks from escalating. The Company provided this data in response to Staff
Production Request No. 48. Staff believes the Company should include the data
below for the three previous years in future WMP filings for deficiencies related to
infrastructure in heightened fire risk areas.
Staff Comments at 17 (emphasis added).
In its Petition, PotlatchDeltic argued that Staff used the terms "should" and "essential" to
describe "a critical flaw in Avista's WMP" with respect to Staffs comment and suggestion on
infrastructure deficiency backlog monitoring. PotlatchDeltic Petition at 17. Following the
Commission's decision to approve the 2026 WMP,PotlatchDeltic stated that"[t]he Commission's
STAFF'S RESPONSE TO PETITION
FOR RECONSIDERATION 3 AUGUST 31, 2026

dismissive characterization of the Staff s observation that `Staff also believed that Avista should'
alters its meaning by implyin&that Staff s use of the word `should' was optional and not `essential
to protect safety' as clearly articulated in Staffs comments." Id. at 18 (emphasis added).
PotlatchDeltic's interpretation misrepresents Staff s suggestion to the Company. Neither
the Wildfire Standard of Care Act("WSCA")nor the Commission's WMP Guidelines require this
particular data to be included within the 2026 WMP. As it is not a minimum requirement, Staff
does not believe that the lack of a monitoring process invalidates the Commission's approval of
the 2026 WMP. As the Company continues to develop and mature its WMP, Staff believes this
suggestion to the Company will support the continued development of future WMPs and does not
constitute a"critical flaw" as stated by PotlatchDeltic.
Ouality Assurance
In Staff Comments, Staff discusses and recommends the Company include a quality
assurance ("QA") process for both the Company's inspection programs and vegetation
management in future WMP filings. Staff stated:
[A] [QA] program is essential because it verifies that completed corrective work
truly resolves the identified issue, ensuring safety, reliability, and accountability
in the utility's maintenance practices. Staff believes the Company should describe
the QA process for each inspection program in future WMP filings.
Staff Comments at 17 (emphasis added).
Similarly, Staff stated that "[t]he Company should consider including a description of its
vegetation management QA process in or as an attachment to future WMP filings." Id. at 19.
PotlatchDeltic argued that Staff believed that QA programs are"not an optional or elective element
of the WMP"and further stated"[Staff] said that including that program is essential in this WMP".
PotlatchDeltic Petition at 17. PotlatchDeltic further concluded that nothing in the record supported
the Commission's rejection of"Staffs offered (and uncontested) evidence that Avista's plan is
missing essential elements." Id. at 19.
PotlatchDeltic misinterpreted Staffs discussion of the importance of QA programs being
required for this WMP. Similar to the section above, neither the WSCA nor the Commission's
WMP Guidelines require a QA program or a description of a QA process to be included in the
2026 WMP. Accordingly, Staff does not believe that the absence of the QA program in this WMP
invalidates the Commission's approval. To clarify, Staff believes its suggested improvements
STAFF'S RESPONSE TO PETITION
FOR RECONSIDERATION 4 AUGUST 31, 2026

would strengthen the Company's WMP over time and help ensure that corrective maintenance is
effective.
CONCLUSION
Staff believes that the Commission correctly and adequately considered Staff s
recommendations in Order No. 37064.
Respectfully submitted this 31 st day of August 2026.
Jeffrey . Loll
Deputy Attorney General
Technical Staff. Kimberly Loskot and Karla Ducharme
I:\Legal\ELECTRIC\AVU-E-25-15_WMP\AVUE2515_Staffs Resp to Ptn for Recon.docx
STAFF'S RESPONSE TO PETITION
FOR RECONSIDERATION 5 AUGUST 31, 2026

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE THIS 31 sT DAY OF AUGUST 2026, SERVED THE
FOREGOING STAFF'S RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION, IN CASE
NO. AVU-E-25-15, BY E-MAILING A COPY THEREOF TO THE FOLLOWING:
Avista:
Anni Glogovac Elizabeth Andrews
Counsel for Regulatory Affairs Sr. Mgr., Revenue Requirements
Avista Corporation Avista Corporation
P.O. Box 3727 P.O. Box 3727
Spokane WA 99220-3727 Spokane WA 99220-3727
anni.glo og vac(kavistacorp.com liz.andrews(kavistacorp.com
avistadockets kavistacorp.com
Potlatch Deltic Forest Holdings, LLC.
Peter J. Richardson Michele Tyler, Esq.
Richardson Adams, PLLC Wade Semeliss
515 N. 27th Street Brian Schlect, Esq.
Boise, ID 83702 Anna Torma
peter(krichardsonadams.com 601 W. First Ave., Ste. 1600
Spokane, WA 99201
michele.tyler(kpotlatchdeltic.com
wade.semelis skpotlatchdeltic.com
brian.schlect(a,potlatchdeltic.com
anna.tormakpotlatchdeltic.com
Idaho Department of Lands: Bennett Lumber, et al.
J.J. Winters Tara Malek
John A. Richards Smith+Malek, PLLC
300 N. 6th St., Ste. 103 601 E. Front Ave., Ste. 304
Boise, ID 83702 Coeur d'Alene, ID 83814
jwinters(a�idl.idaho.gov servicenmalekattorne. s
j rchards(k idl.i daho.gov
Keri J. Ha ker
Legal Assistant
STAFF'S RESPONSE TO PETITION
FOR RECONSIDERATION 6 AUGUST 31, 2026