20120320Exergy 8-40 to IPC.pdf

,1',
Peter J. Richardson
Gregory M. Adams
Richardson & O'Lear, PLLC
515 N. 27th Street
P.O. Box 7218
Boise, Idaho 83702
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
peter~chardsonandolear.com
gregc$richardsonandolear.com
RECE
iUI2 KAR 20 PH 4: 08
Attorneys for Exergy Development Group of Idaho, LLC
BEFORE THE
IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF THE COMMISSION'S )
REVIEW OF PURP A QFCONTRACT )
PROVISIONS INCLUDING THE )
SURROGATE AVOIDED RESOURCE )
PLANING (IRP) METHODOLOGIES FOR )
CALCULATING PUBLISHED AVOIDED )
COST RATES )
)
CASE NO. GNR-E-II-03
SECOND PRODUCTION REQUEST
OF EXERGY DEVELOPMENT
GROUP OF IDAHO TO IDAHO
POWER COMPANY
Pursuant to Rule 225 of the Rules of Procedure of the Idaho Public Utilties Commission
(the "Commssion"), Exergy Development Group of Idaho, LLC hereby requests that Idaho
Power Company ("Idaho Power" or "Company") provide responses to the following with
supporting documents, where applicable, as soon as possible, but no later than April 10, 2012.
This production request is to be considered as continuing, and Idaho Power is requested
to provide by way of supplementa responses additional documents that it or any person acting
on its behalf may later obtain that will augment the responses or documents produced.
Please provide one physical copy of your responses to the address above, and electronic
copies, if available, to Mr. Richardson and Mr. Adams at the addresses noted above, and one
, '
copy to Dr. Reading at 6070 Hil Road, Boise, Idaho 83703. Please provide Dr. Reading's copy
in electronic format, if available, to dreading~dsprig.com. Please begin each response on
a separate page and provide page numbers on responses longer than one page.
For each item, please indicate the name of the person(s) preparng the answers, along
with the job title of such person(s) and the witness at hearing who can sponsor the answer.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.8:
For the PowerPoint presentation the Company made at the meeting to present and discuss IRP
Models at the Idaho Public Utilties Commssion on December l5, 2011, and attached as Exhibit
No.3, to Mark Stokes's Direct Testimony, please provide all work papers, spreadsheets in
electronic format with formulas intact, and model outputs used in producing Exhbit 3.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.9:
Reference the four QF confgurations analyzed in Exhibit NO.3 of Mark Stokes's Direct
Testimony. Please list for each of Company's gas-fired generation plants the anual capacity
factor, by year, beginning in 2013 through the end of the 20 year analysis period.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 10:
Reference the Company's 2011 IRP's near-term action plan milestones (Table 1.2, p. 8), stating
plans to secure an 83 MW PPA for the sumer of2015 from the east side. Please provide the
prices the Company would offer a QF (at 80 MW) that would provide power in the same
configuration sought by Idaho Power.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 11:
According to the Commission's accepted "IRP Methodology' (IPUC Order No. 26576, IPC-E-
95-9) and IPUC Staff Witness Rick Sterling's direct testimony Exhbit LOL, "the avoided cost of
the QF project is the difference in the present value of the revenue requirements (PVRR)
between the base case resource plan and a modified resource plan that includes the QF resource."
(Exhbit 101, IPC-E-95-9, R. Sterling, page l4.) Under the existing IRP Methodology in place
on the date of this request, please explain in detail how the Company incorporates the "revenue
requiement" as it would in filing for a certificate of public convenience and necessity (CPCN,
i.e. retur of and on investment, all taes, etc.), in the calculation of rates offered in contracts to
QFs.
Page 2 - SECOND PRODUCTION REQUEST OF EXERGY
TO IDAHO POWER- GNR-E-II-03
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 12:
Reference the Direct Testimony of Tessia Park, p 18, discussing the Company's proposed Tarff
Schedule 74 (Exhbit No.5).
(a) Please identify the provision ofIdaho Power's proposed Tarff Schedule 74 that would
compensate QFs for curailments occuring without providing the required notice, or
where the basis for the curailment was not supported by the circumstances described in
18 C.F.R. § 292.304(t). Ifno such provision is included, please explain why.
(b) Please explain Idaho Power's basis for only proposing to provide QFs one-hour notice
prior to such curailments. Is Idaho Power aware of any FERC or state commission order
that has authorized advance notice of one hour or less to QFs in implementing 18 C.F.R.
§ 292.304(t)?
(c) Does Idaho Power believe that it has the right to curtail QFs to under 18 C.F.R.
292.304(t) even when the applicable QF contract provides for no such curailment? If so,
please explain the basis for this position.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 13:
Reference the Direct Testimony of Tessia Park, p. 11, stating, "Based upon the curent price of
natural gas, dispatch costs of Langley Gulch will be approximately $22."
(a) What is the curent price of gas used to calculate the $22 Langley Gulch dispatch cost?
(b) What is the price of gas Idaho Power expects to pay when Langley Gulch comes on line
the sumer of2012, and the expected dispatch cost at that gas price?
(c) What price of gas does Idaho Power expect to pay for Langley Gulch, and what is the
associated expected dispatch cost anualy over the next 20 years?
(d) What is the fixed cost of Langley Gulch in $/MWh? What is the fixed cost of a QF to the
Company?
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 14:
Reference the Direct Testimony of Tessia Park, pp. 11-12, stating, "For example, the Company
curently pays in the range of low-$50 per MWh up to $85 or more per MWh for PURP A
generation." Please provide the rate ($/MWh) curently paid by Idaho Power, in electronic
format, to its on-line PURPA projects.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 15:
Reference the Direct Testimony of Tessia Park, p. 23, stating, "The following example is based
upon an actual generation day in October 2011." Please provide in electronic format:
Page 3 - SECOND PRODUCTION REQUEST OF EXERGY
TO IDAHO POWER - GNR-E- 1 1-03
(a) The date of the referenced day in the example,
(b) The hourly (or less) load profile for the day,
(c) The hourly (or less) output of each of the resources used to meet the load for the day,
(d) The dispatch cost of each of the resources used to meet the load for the day,
(e) The heavy load cost of purchase power for the day,
(t) The cost of gas peakg unts, if they were to be used, for the day.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 16:
Reference the Direct Testimony of Tessia Park, p. 23, stating, "The Company is proposing to
apply this policy to all PURP A contracts, both existing and new, that are projects which contain
generator output control limiters ("GOCLs") and are 1 0 MW or larger in size." Please provide a
list of all existing PUR A projects and identify those that have "GOCLs" and those that do not.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 17:
Reference the Direct Testimony of Tessia Park, p. 7, stating, the "limiting conditions on the
amount of variable generation from PURP A resources which Idaho Power can accommodate are
not apparent during periods of relatively high customer demand."
(a) Please defie "relatively high customer demand" as used in ths statement.
(b) Please estimate the level of demand at which Idao Power believes there wil be no
limiting conditions for existing and contracted QFs.
(c) For the years 2010 and 2011, please provide the hours and days of the year that Idaho
Power's load fell below the level described in item (b).
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 18:
Reference the Direct Testimony of Tessia Park, p. 14, stating, "Idaho Power has been working
on an update to its wind integration study for some time. However, difficulties in modeling Idaho
Power's electrcal system and generation resources in the model used by the consultat hired to
pedorm the study, have delayed the completion of the study."
(a) Please describe the modeling errors referenced.
(b) Please provide any correspondence between Idaho Power and the consultant describing
the modeling errors.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 19:
Reference the Direct Testimony of Tessia Park, p. 20, stating, "Pursuant to FERC licenses Idaho
Power has for its ru-of-river hydro electrc projects, the Company is obligated to take whatever
Page 4 - SECOND PRODUCTION REQUEST OF EXERGY
TO IDAHO POWER - GNR-E-11-03
generation flows through them; it does not have the abilty to decrease or increase the
generation. "
(a) Please identify each of the ru-of-river hydro plants and provide the capacity of each.
(b) Please provide the FERC license for each project (in electronic format if available).
(c) Please identify the provision (page number, section number, as applicable) in each FERC
license that Idaho Power relies on to determine it does not have the abilty to decrease or
increase the generation.
(d) For each plant, please explain whether the plant has the operational capability to spil
water without generating electrcity, and any restrctions on Idaho Power's abilty to do
so.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 20:
Reference the Direct Testimony of Tessia Park, p. 23, stating, "the Company must maintain
constat flows below Hells Canyon da for environmental compliance, thus limiting the abilty
to curl generation out ofthe Hells Canyon Complex to no less than approximately 350 MW."
(a) Please identify the individual plants/dams at the Hells Canyon Complex and the MW
capacity of each.
(b) Please explain the environmental compliance requirement for each that limits the abilty
to curil generation and provide the minimum generation of each individual project.
Please identify the governent agency imposing the compliance requirement.
(c) For each plant, please explain whether the plant has the operational capabilty to spil
water without generating electricity. Please explain why generation canot be curailed
to 0 MW by spiling, or to any cumulative output below 350 MW for the Complex.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 21:
Reference the Direct Testimony of Tessia Park, p. 1, stating dispatch costs for the Company's
coal units are approximately $30/MWh and for Langley Gulch are $22/MWh.
(a) Please explain why the Company would not tae its coal plants offine and instead ru
Langley Gulch during times when it expects to have light loading periods.
(b) For Langley Gulch, the ru-of-river hydro projects, and the Hells Canyon Complex,
please provide the minimum and maximum output for each that Idaho Power could
reasonably expect to obtain durng periods of the year that Idaho Power expects to
experience light loading events. Please explain the basis for the estimates for each
category.
Page 5 - SECOND PRODUCTION REQUEST OF EXERGY
TO IDAHO POWER - GNR-E-II-03
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 22:
Reference the Direct Testimony of Tessia Park, p. 24, describing conditions where the Company
has sufficient base load generation to service 1,100 MW of load.
(a) For the years 2010 and 2011, please provide the hours and days of the year that Idaho
Power's load was at or below 1,100 MW.
(b) Please provide the number of hours, days, weeks, or months in advance that Idao Power
can accurately predict that reachig loads ths low will occur.
(c) For each such occurence, please provide the maximum load within the 7 days following
the light loading event.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 23:
Reference the Direct Testimony of Tessia Park, p. 24, describing the minimum base generation
(300 MW thermal, 817 MW hydro, and 50 MW non-intermittent PURP A) to be near 1,100 MW.
Please explain why Idaho Power could not plan for an expected light loading period coinciding
with possible excess QF generation by un-designating the network resource status of a specified
quantity of this base generation, and using its fast-ramping, remaining Hells Canyon capacity to
serve load in the event that intermittent QF generation did not occur as predicted.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 24:
Reference the Direct Testimony of Mark Stokes, p. 7, presenting a figue titled "Idaho Power
Compared to Regional RPS Stadards."
(a) Please explain which state or proposed federal RPS or RES standard Idaho Power used to
determe whether the generation from the QFs included in the graph would quaify
under the applicable standad.
(b) Please provide Idaho Power's work papers used to generate the 19% RPS compliant
generation figue.
(c) Please list generation facilties that comprise the 19% RPS compliant generation,
including their generation tye for each (wind, small hydropower, cogeneration, etc.),
nameplate capacity, assumed anual generation, and whether the Company will receive
any REC's from the QF.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 25:
Reference the Direct Testimony of Mark Stokes, p. 14, "Because a vast majority ofthe new
PURP A contracts are for wind projects, Idaho Power will stil have to build new resources in
order to meet projected growth in peak-hour demand." Please indicate the new resources, by
type of resource, the Company assumes it will need to build, and the year it expects to need these
resources.
Page 6 - SECOND PRODUCTION REQUEST OF EXERGY
TO IDAHO POWER - GNR-E-11-03
, ,
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 25:
Reference the Direct Testimony of Mark Stokes, p. 16, presenting a figure titled "Average
PURPA Price Compared to Mid-C Index, 2002-2022."
(a) Please provide the average anual energy cost and capacity cost ($/MWh) of each of the
Company's thermal resources (Bridger, Valmy, Boardman, Danskin, Bennett Mountan,
and Langley Gulch) over the same time frame.
(b) Please provide the figues for the average Mid-C Index compared and the PURP A Price
from 1980 to 2002, or as far back as available. Please also include the energy and
capacity costs for the coal plants listed in item (a) for years where those are available
prior to 2002.
(c) Is the Mid-C Index price used in the figure a spot market price or the price of firm
power? If it is a spot price, please provide an estimate in the difference in cost ($/MWh)
of the Average Mid-C Index and the cost to secure firm market purchases from Mid-C,
and explain the basis for the estimate.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 26:
Reference the Direct Testimony of Mark Stokes, p. 18, describing the differential between what
Idaho Power will pay for PURPA generation in 2012 and the amount it would pay to purchase
the same amount of generation as a "firm" product in the Mid-C market.
(a) Please provide a detailed definition and an example of a "firm" product, including the
maximum term (years and months) for which Idaho Power could secure a firm market
purchase in 2012. Does this cost include the cost of firm transmission from Mid-C to
Idaho Power's system?
(b) Please estimate the amount of firm transmission (MW) Idaho Power possesses or could
secure from Mid-C to Idaho Power's loads.
(b) Using the same figures for the cost of firm market product used in the testimony, please
provide the differential for the cost for Langley Gulch (including all varable and fixed
costs passed onto customers through rates) for each year from 2012 to 2021, in dollars
and in $/MWh. Please prorate the costs of market purchases for 2012 to account for the
date Idaho Power estimates Langley Gulch costs will be incured by customers in that
year.
(c) Please provide a detaled explanation of the assumptions used in the calculation in the
testimony and in the calculations in response to this request.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 27:
Reference the Direct Testimony of Mark Stokes, p. 21, stating, "There are several times when
QF generation has and wil generate at or close to nameplate capacity. For example, on
December 21,2011,. . . . Idaho Power received 7,028 MWh (293a aMW) from the 20 PURPA
Page 7 - SECOND PRODUCTION REQUEST OF EXERGY
TO IDAHO POWER - GNR-E-II-03
. .
wind projects on-line (nameplate rating of398 MW)." Please provide the same figues and date
where wind QFs have generated closest to nameplate capacity.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 28:
Reference the Direct Testimony of Mark Stokes, p. 21, comparng the cost of wind QF output on
December 21,2011 to the cost of the short-term, daily average Mid-C market price.
(a) Please provide the MWh output and capacity factors for each of the Company's thermal
unts on December 21, 2011.
(b) Please provide the MWh cost, including both energy and capacity of the Company's
thermal resources on December 21, 2011.
(c) Please provide the long-term, firm Mid-C market price for the same date, and please add
to the cost for firm transmission from Mid-C to Idaho Power's system. Please explain
any assumption used in providing these costs.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 29:
Reference the Direct Testimony of Mark Stokes, p. 39, stating, "The estimated 20-year, levelized
cost of Langley Gulch is $68.55 per MWh using a 90 percent capacity factor assumption (to be
consistent with the SAR capacity factor assumption), and Idaho Power's curent natual gas price
forecast. "
(a) Please provide work papers and all cost assumptions for the $68.55 per MWh figue for
Langley Gulch, including interconnection and transmission costs, gas price and
transportation/storage costs, heat rate, assumed heat rate degradation, equivalent
availabilty factor, capital cost, varable O&M, fixed O&M, O&M escalation rates, and
inflation, as well as any other cost assumptions. Please provide the basis for each
assumption for each of the listed items.
(b) Please provide the levelized $/MWh cost of Langley Gulch for both energy and capacity
at the 84% capacity the Company expects the facility will have available for planng
puroses. Reference IPUC Order 30392, p. 17.
(c) Please provide the levelized $/MWh cost of Langley Gulch for both energy and capacity
at the 20 year average 49% capacity factor provided in Karl Bokenkamp's Direct
Testimony, p. 23.
(d) Please explain ifIdaho Power wil commit to pass onto its customers a 20-year levelized
cost for Langley Gulch that will not exceed the estimates above (allowing for adjustment
to customers' rates only to account for different capacity factors).
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 30:
Please provide all of the curent assumptions for the gas SAR model for all inputs used to
generate the 20-year levelized, non-fueled, published avoided cost rate of $70.92 per MWh,
discussed in Mr. Stokes' Direct Testimony, p. 39.
Page 8 - SECOND PRODUCTION REQUEST OF EXERGY
TO IDAHO POWER- GNR-E-11-03
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 31:
Reference the Direct Testimony of Mark Stokes, p. 32, lines 5-8. . Please provide the solar
integration study relied upon by Idaho Power. If no such study exists, please explain the basis
for the assumptions regarding solar integration, and steps the Company plans to take to
accurately compute that alleged cost.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 32:
Reference the Direct Testimony of Mark Stokes, p. 45, recommending implementation of "a
PURP A QF contraction process and negotiation tarff schedule." Please provide Idaho Power's
proposed negotiation tariff. If no proposed taff exists, please describe the procedures Idaho
Power recommends, and when Idaho Power plans to file the taff.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 33:
Reference the Direct Testimony of Karl Bokenkamp, p. 25, describing Idaho Power's proposed
assumption that each thermal unit will assigned an incremental cost based on full load operation.
(a) Is it true that when a thermal unit is operated at less than full load that the incremental
cost per MWh increases?
(b) For each of the Company's thermal unts, please provide: (1) heat rate at maximum
output, (2) heat rate at minimum operating output, (3) incrementa energy cost at the heat
rate in (1) and (2).
(c) For each ofthe Company's thermal units, please provide the number of
hours per year in
the years 2008 through 2011 that the unit operated at ful load operation.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 34:
Reference the Direct Testimony of Karl Bokenkamp, p. 15, stating, "As an example, out of a
total of 157,776 hours in an AURORA simulation for a 22 megawatt ("MW") wind project, the
new methodology assigned an avoided cost of $O/MWh in 1,563 hours. This works out to about
1 percent of the time, or 87 hours per year." Please provide the complete AURORA output from
this simulation ru along with a full explanation of the how the new methodology is
implemented.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 35:
Reference the Direct Testimony of Karl Bokenkamp, p. 15, stating,
Idaho Power can look at several different hypothetical cases to ilustrate how the
methodology wil assign incremental costs. For example, in case 1 load is 2,000 MW, the
system is balanced, Idaho Power has one or more thermal unts in operation, and there are
Page 9 - SECOND PRODUCTION REQUEST OF EXERGY
TO IDAHO POWER - GNR-E-I1-03
no purchases; in case 2, identical conditions exist with the following exception, a "new"
QF generates and delivers one MWh of energy to Idaho Power's system. One of two
thngs must happen for the system to remai balanced either Idaho Power's resources
must reduce output by one MWh or one MWh is sold into the market.
Please provide the complete AURORA outputs from the case 1 and case 2 rus along with a ful
explanation of the how the new methodology is implemented to produce the values reported for
each case in Mr. Bokenkamp's testimony.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 36:
Reference the Direct Testimony of Karl Bokenkamp, p. 24, proposing to continue using the
peak-hour capacity factor calculation that is curently utilzed. Please explain fully the "peak-
hour capacity factor" and demonstrate how it is used in the calculation of avoided costs.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 37:
Reference the Direct Testimony of Karl Bokenkamp, p. 29, "Idaho Power proposes that any QFs
with signed contracts and any 'queued' QFs be included in Idaho Power's resource portfolio for
puroses of calculating futue avoided costs because they can impact futue avoided costs. For
puroses of calculating avoided costs, Idaho Power proposes that upon its receipt of a wrtten
request from a QF for contract pricing, the QF is designated as 'queued.'''
(a) For the years 2008 through 2012, please identify the QFs from whom Idaho Power has
received a written request for contract pricing with IRP methodology rates (using
numbers or other identifiers to preserve confdentiality if necessar).
(b) For each of the projects listed in response to (a), please provide the date of the request for
pricing, and whether the QF executed a PPA with Idaho Power for the project, and
whether the IPUC has approved the PPA for which pricing was requested.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 38:
Reference the Direct Testimony of Karl Bokenkamp, pp. 12-13, discussing Idaho Power's
proposal to include Longer-term firm purchases such as the PPL EnergyPlus Power Purchase
Contract in the IRP Methodology calculations as a must ru resource. Please identify each ofthe
Longer-term firm purchases, and for each please provide:
(a) Quantify of energy supplied to Idaho Power;
(b) Term;
(c) The basis to assume that the resource is "must ru," with explanation of applicable
contractul requirements.
Page 10 - SECOND PRODUCTION REQUEST OF EXERGY
TO IDAHO POWER - GNR-E-I1-03
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 39:
Reference the Direct Testimony of Karl Bokenkamp, p. 22, proposing that an SCCT replace a
CCCT for purposes of calculating the capacity component of the IRP Methodology calculation.
(a) For the years 2008 through 2011, please provide the number of days per year that Idaho
Power operated its gas peakers (Bennett Mountain or Danskin) to meet load.
(b) Please provide the number of days per year that Idaho Power forecasts to use Langley
Gulch to meet load requirements, as assumed in Idaho Power's load and resource balance
from its IRP.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 40:
Reference the Direct Testimony of Karl Bokenkamp, p. 21, describing Idaho Power's proposed
IRP Methodology's focus on the incremental cost from Idaho Power's generating resources.
(a) Is Idaho Power proposing to not consider projected market prices as the possible next
incremental unit used to meet load in its IRP Methodology?
(b) Please provide the number of days per year that Idaho Power engaged in market
purchases in 2009,2010, and 2011.
DATED:March 20,2012
QJ
Peter J. Richardson
Gregory M. Adams
RICHARDSON & O'LEARY PLLC
Page 11 - SECOND PRODUCTION REQUEST OF EXERGY
TO IDAHO POWER-GNR-E-11-03
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on the 20th day of March, 2012, a tre and correct copy of the
within and foregoing SECOND PRODUCTION REQUESTS OF EXERGY DEVELOPMENT
GROUP OF IDAHO, LLC. TO IDAHO POWER COMPANY was served as shown to:
Jean D. Jewell, Secreta
Idaho Public Utilties Commission
472 West Washington
Boise, Idaho 83702
iean.jewellc$puc.idaho. gov
X. Hand Delivery
_U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
X Electronic Mail
Donald Howell
Krs Sasser
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
472 West Washington
Boise, Idaho 83702
donald.howellc$puc.idaho.gov
krsine.sasserc$puc.idaho. gov
X. Hand Delivery
_U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
-X Electronic Mail
Donovan E. Walker
Lisa D. Nordstrom
Idaho Powe Company
POBox 70
Boise, ID 83707-0070
dwalkerc$idahopower.com
lnordstromc$idahopower.com
_ Hand Delivery
_U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
-X Electronic Mail
Michael G. Andrea
Avista Corporation
P.O. Box 3727
Spokane, W A 99220
michael. andreac$avistacorp. com
_ Hand Delivery
_U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
-X Electronic Mail
Electronic Copies Only:
Ken Kaufman
Lovinger Kaufan LLP
825 NE Multnomah Ste 925
Portland, OR 97232
Kaufanc$lklaw.com
_ Hand Delivery
_U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
-X Electronic Mail
Daniel So lander
PacifiCorp/dba Rocky Mountain Power
201 S Mai St Ste 2300
Salt Lake City, UT 84111
danel.solanderc$pacificorp.com
_ Hand Delivery
_U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
-X Electronic Mail
Dean J. Miler
McDevitt & Miler, LLP
420 W. Banock St.
Boise, ID 83702
joetßcdevitt-miler .com
_ Hand Delivery
_U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
-X Electronic Mail
Thomas H. Nelson
Renewable Energy Coalition
PO Box 1211
Welches, OR 97067-1211
nelsonc$thelson.com
_ Hand Delivery
_U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
-X Electronic Mail
JohnR. Lowe
Consultat
Renewable Energy Coalition
12050 SW Tremont St
Portland, OR 97225
j ravenesanarosc$yahoo. com
_ Hand Delivery
_U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
-X Electronic Mail
R. Greg Ferney
Mimura Law Offices PLLC
Interconnect Solar Development, LLC
2176 E Franin Rd Ste 120
Meridian, ID 83642
gre gtßimuralaw. com
_ Hand Delivery
_U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
-X Electronic Mail
Bil Piske, Manager
Interconnect Solar Development, LLC
1303 E. Carer
Boise, ID 83706
bilpiskec$cableone.net
_ Hand Delivery
_U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
-X Electronic Mail
Ronald L. Willams
Wiliams Bradbur, PC
1015 W. Hays Street
Boise, ID 83702
ronc$willamsbradbur.com
_ Hand Delivery
_U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
-X Electronic Mail
Wade Thomas
General Counsel
Dynamis Energy, LLC
776 W. Riverside Dr., Ste 15
Eagle, ID 83616
wtomasc$dynamisenergy.com
_ Hand Delivery
_U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
-X Electronic Mail
Shelley M. Davis
Barker Rosholt & Simpson LLP
1010W. Jefferson St (83702)
PO Box 2139
Boise, ID 83701
smdc$idahowaters.com
Brian Olmstead
General Manager
Twin Falls Canal Company
PO Box 326
Twin Falls, ID 83303
olmsteadc$tfcanal.com
Robert A. Paul
Grand View Solar II
15690 Vista Circle
Desert Hot Springs, CA 92241
robertpaul08c$gmail.com
James Carkuis
Exergy Development Group of Idaho, LLC
802 W. Banock, Ste 1200
Boise, ID 83702
j carkulisc$exergydevelopment.com
Arron F. Jepson
Blue Ribbon Energy, LLC
10660 South 540 East
Sandy, UT 84070
aronesgc$aol.com
M.J. Humphres
Blue Ribbon Energy, LLC
4515 S. Amon Rd.
Amon, ID 83406
blueribbonenergyc$gmail.com
Ted Diehl
General Manager
Nort Side Canal Company
921 N. Lincoln St.
Jerome, il 83338
nscanal~cableone.net
_ Hand Delivery
_U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
-X Electronic Mail
_ Hand Delivery
_U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
-X Electronic Mail
_ Hand Delivery
_U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
-X Electronic Mail
_ Hand Delivery
_U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
-X Electronic Mail
_ Hand Delivery
_U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
-X Electronic Mail
_ Hand Delivery
_U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
-X Electronic Mail
_ Hand Delivery
_U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
-X Electronic Mail
l I , ..
Bil Brown
Adams County Board of Commissioners
PO Box 48
Council, IT 83612
bdbrown~frontiernet.net
_ Hand Delivery
_U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
-X Electronic Mail
Ted S. Sorenson, PE
Birch Poer Company
5203 South 11 th East
Idaho Falls, ID 83404
ted(ßtsorenson.net
_ Hand Delivery
_U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
-X Electronic Mail
Glenn Ikemoto
Margaret Rueger
Idaho Windfars, LLC
6762 Blair Avenue
Piedmont, CA 94611
glenn(ßenvisionwind.com
margaret(ßenvisionwind.com
_ Hand Delivery
_U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
-X Electronic Mail
Megan Walseth Decker
Senior Staf Counsel
Renewable Nortwest Project
917 SW Oak Street Ste 303
Portand, OR 97205
megan(ßrnp.org
_ Hand Delivery
_U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
-X Electronic Mail
Benjamin J. Otto
Idaho Conservation League
710 N. Sixth Street (83702)
POBox 844
Boise, ID 83701
botto~idahoconservation.org
_ Hand Delivery
_U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
-X Electronic Mail
Ken Miler
Snake River Alliance
PO Box 1731
Boise, ID 83701
kmilerc$snakeriveralliance.org
_ Hand Delivery
_U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
-X Electronic Mail
.... # I
Robert D. Kah
Executive Director
Nortwest & Intermountan Power Producers
Coalition
1117 Minor Ave., Ste 300
Seattle, W A 98101
rkah(ßppc.org
Don Stuevant
Energy Director
J.R. Simplot Company
PO Box 27
Boise,ID 83707-0027
don.stuevant~simplot.com
Mar Lewallen
Clearater Paper Corporation
601 W Riverside Ave Ste 1100
Spokane WA 99201
mar. lewallen(ßclearaterpaper. com
_ Hand Delivery
_U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
-X Electronic Mail
_ Hand Delivery
_U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
-X Electronic Mail
_ Hand Delivery
_U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
X Electronic Mail
CJ
dams