20100503min.doc

IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION

MINUTES OF DECISION MEETING

MAY 3, 2010 – 10:00 A.M.

In attendance were Commissioners Jim Kempton, Mack Redford, and Marsha Smith, who participated by telephone.

Commissioner Kempton called the meeting to order. The first order of business was MATTERS IN PROGRESS:

Case No. GNR-E-10-01 (Published Avoided Cost Rates; SAR Methodology -- Fuel Cost Adjustment) Petition for Reconsideration -- Final O.N. 31025; Notice of Scheduling, O.N. 31057 -- Petitioner Comment Deadline (4/28/10). [No Memo. Scott Woodbury, Attorney.]
Commissioner Kempton stated that in Order No. 31057, the Commission granted reconsideration for the limited purpose of allowing Petitioners to file written comments regarding the new avoided cost rates that were published in Order No. 31025, and specifically addressing whether those costs were correctly calculated. He noted that the Petitioners filed comments on April 28th, 2010, and the Commission had reviewed those comments and was prepared to decide whether the rates were correctly calculated. He added that the Commissioners had reviewed all the documents associated with the case: Order No. 31025; Petition of Windland, Inc. and AgPower Jerome, LLC for Reconsideration of Order No. 31025; Notice of Scheduling for Reconsideration of Order No. 31057; Reply by Windland, Inc. and AgPower Jerome, LLC to Comments provided by PacifiCorp dba Rocky Mountain Power; and Comments on Limited Reconsideration by Windland, Inc. and AgPower regarding Order No. 31025. Commissioner Kempton said the question before the Commission was to consider the Comments provided by AgPower Jerome, LLC and Windland, Inc. for the purpose of accepting the request for reconsideration and the Prayer for Relief. He asked if there was any discussion.
Commissioner Redford stated that in Order No. 31025, the Commission ordered and approved the revised avoided cost rates for PURPA projects, and on April 6th, 2010, the Petitioners Windland and AgPower requested the Commission reconsider Order No. 31025. He said the Commission granted reconsideration on April 21st and established a filing schedule for the Petitioners to comment on the accuracy of the revised and upgraded calculations in Order No. 31057. He said the Petitioners filed Reply Comments on Limited Reconsideration on April 28th and in reviewing those comments, he had determined that the Petitioners did not argue on the correctness of the calculations of the avoided cost rates set forth in Order No. 31025 but had confined their comments to procedural issues regarding notice. He said that because the Petitioners did not comment on the correctness of the calculations of the avoided costs, he would move to reaffirm the avoided costs as found in Order No. 31025.
Commissioner Smith stated that she supported the motion. She also commented that when the Commission issued its order last year to change the rates, the Commission clearly stated in the order its concerns about the forecast it was relying on to establish the rates and stated that when the new forecast was issued by the Northwest Power and Conservation Council with its final sixth power plan, the Commission would change the rates. Commissioner Smith said the Commission has therefore been consistent in what it wanted to do. She added that in the Comments on Limited Reconsideration filed by Windland and AgPower, there were several inaccurate characterizations of the Commission’s order and she wanted to address one of them. She noted that on page 6 of Windland’s comments it states that the Commission’s singular focus is on minimizing the amount utilities pay for PURPA contracts, and that statement is very inaccurate. She said utilities don’t pay—the ratepayers are the ones who are paying. She stated that if it was the Commission’s singular focus to minimize the amount paid, the Commission would change other provisions, such as the project size eligible for the PURPA rate and the length of the contract term. She said the Commission’s goal is to accurately reflect the Council’s latest natural gas price forecast in the rates, as is in the Commission’s established procedure for the Surrogate Avoided Resource. She said she therefore supported the motion made by Commissioner Redford.
A vote was taken on the motion and it carried unanimously.
There was no further business before the Commission and Commissioner Kempton adjourned the meeting.

__________________________________ ________________________
COMMISSION SECRETARY DATE OF APPROVAL

1