Attch49_IPCE0113_IPCReconsideration.pdf

Telephone [phone], FAX [phone]
LARRY D. RIPLEY
Senior Attorney

December 11, 2001

Ms. Jean D. Jewell, Secretary
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
472 W. Washington Street
P.O. Box 83720
Boise, Idaho 83720-0074

Re: Idaho Power Company’s Petition for Clarification Or,
In the Alternative, Petition For Reconsideration of
Order No. 28894 -- Case No. IPC-E-01-13

Dear Ms. Jewell:

Please find enclosed for filing an original and seven (7) copies of Idaho
Power Company’s Petition for Clarification, or, in the Alternative, Petition for
Reconsideration of Order No. 28894 regarding the above-entitled case.

I would appreciate it if you would return a stamped copy of this transmittal
letter for our files.

Very truly yours,

Larry D. Ripley

LDR:jb
Enclosures

IDAHO POWER COMPANY’S PETITION FOR CLARIFICATION OR, IN THE
ALTERNATIVE, PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ORDER NO. 28894, Page 1
LARRY D. RIPLEY ISB #965
Idaho Power Company
P.O. Box 70
Boise, Idaho 83707
Phone: [phone]
FAX: [phone]

Attorneys for Idaho Power Company

Express Mail Address

1221 West Idaho Street
Boise, Idaho 83702

BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION

IN THE MATTER OF THE INVESTIGATION ) CASE NO. IPC-E-01-13
OF INCREASED DEMAND-SIDE MANAGE- )
MENT PROGRAMS AND THE FUNDING OF ) IDAHO POWER COMPANY’S
THOSE PROGRAMS FOR IDAHO POWER ) PETITION FOR CLARIFICATION
COMPANY ) OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE,
) PETITION FOR RECONSIDER-
) ATION

Pursuant to RP 325, Idaho Power Company (“Idaho Power” or “the
Company”) herewith petitions for clarification of a provision of Order No. 28894. In the
alternative, the Company also petitions for reconsideration of Order No. 28894 pursuant to
Idaho Code § 61-626 and RP 331. The petition for clarification, or in the alternative
reconsideration, is based upon the following allegations:
I.
The pertinent provisions of Commission Order No. 28894, which are
summarized on Page 1, provide as follows:

IDAHO POWER COMPANY’S PETITION FOR CLARIFICATION OR, IN THE
ALTERNATIVE, PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ORDER NO. 28894, Page 2
A.
. . . In this Order, the Commission: 1) directs implementation of limited DSM
programs for this winter hearing season; 2) orders the organization of an
Idaho power DSM Advisory Group; and 3) postpones consideration of a
DSM surcharge until the Company’s Power Cost Adjustment (PCA)
application is filed next spring.
B.
The pertinent ordering paragraphs from Order No. 28894, Pages 8 and 9,
provide as follows:
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Idaho Power Company use the BPA
Conservation and Renewables Discount credit to: 1) send informational
materials targeted to residential customers who use greater than 2000 kWh
per month or qualify for low-income assistance; 2) provide Home Energy
Audits on customer request; and 3) fund in-house residential weatherization
programs and supplement Low Income Weatherization Assistance as
described in detail above.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Idaho Power separately account for
the BPA expenses addressed in the preceding paragraph and the BPA
conservation credits it receives. The Company may seek recovery of
reasonable expenditures above the BPA conservation credit.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Company develop the advisory
group discussed above in preparation of the Commission’s further
consideration of funding mechanisms next spring.

IDAHO POWER COMPANY’S PETITION FOR CLARIFICATION OR, IN THE
ALTERNATIVE, PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ORDER NO. 28894, Page 3
II.
As set forth above, the Commission’s summary of its order, as well as its
ordering paragraphs, provides that Idaho Power take certain actions. As to those required
actions Idaho Power has neither any need for clarification nor any objection. However, in
the body of the Commission’s Order, under the heading of “2. Comprehensive Long-Term
DSM Program”, Page 7, there is a discussion that the Energy Efficiency Advisory Group
(“Advisory Group”) should consider the implementation of a time-of-use metering pilot
program. The Commission’s Order, at Page 7, states in pertinent part:
Although a residential time-of-use metering pilot program may not be
appropriate this winter, the Energy Efficiency Advisory Group shall consider
implementing such a program using private contractors through a Request
for Proposals (RFP) process. The advisory group should also consider
installing time-of-use meters in new subdivisions and the feasibility of
allowing existing customers to voluntarily install time-of-use meters and
amortize the cost over multiple years.
It is as to this paragraph that Idaho Power requests clarification, or, in the alternative,
reconsideration.
PETITION FOR CLARIFICATION
A literal reading of the paragraph on Page 7 of Commission Order No.
28894 could be interpreted as providing that the Advisory Group would be responsible for
the implementation of a time-of-use metering pilot program. In proposing the Energy
Efficiency Advisory Group, the Company intended that the Group would address energy
efficiency measures funded by the proposed rider (i.e., measures that improve end-use
efficiency in order to reduce consumption and conserve energy) and that the Group's role

IDAHO POWER COMPANY’S PETITION FOR CLARIFICATION OR, IN THE
ALTERNATIVE, PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ORDER NO. 28894, Page 4
would be advisory. The Company notes that a time-of-use metering pilot program is not an
energy efficiency (conservation) program and that a time-of-use metering pilot program
must deal not only with metering but also with rate design and billing system issues. Idaho
Power does intend to present to the Commission its findings and recommendations
concerning a time-of-use metering pilot program. The Company, however, does not
believe that the Commission intended that the Energy Efficiency Advisory Group would
perform this function.
PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION
In the event that Idaho Power is mistaken and it was the intention of the
Commission to vest in the Energy Efficiency Advisory Group the authority to implement and
determine the funding of a time-of-use metering pilot program, the Company respectfully
petitions for reconsideration. This requirement is not stated in the Commission’s summary
of its Order, nor is it contained in the ordering paragraphs of Order No. 28894. Such a
requirement would remove from Idaho Power its traditional management functions and
place management decisions under the control of an Advisory Group which Group would,
in effect, be responsible to no one. The Company respectfully submits that such a
requirement is not in the public interest and would exceed the Commission’s authority.
RECOVERY OF INTERVENOR FUNDING
The Company has no objection to the Commission’s determination that
intervenor funding has been awarded the Land and Water Fund of the Rockies in the
amount of $4,749.04. The Commission’s Order, however, does not explicitly provide that
this payment should be deferred for recovery in the 2002-2003 PCA. The Company
assumes that this was the intention of the Commission and requests clarification for the
benefit of its auditors.

IDAHO POWER COMPANY’S PETITION FOR CLARIFICATION OR, IN THE
ALTERNATIVE, PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ORDER NO. 28894, Page 5
WHEREFORE, Idaho Power respectfully petitions for clarification of the
requirement for a time-of-use metering pilot program and requests that the Commission
clarify that it is the responsibility of Idaho Power to investigate and make recommendations
to the Commission as to a time-of-use metering pilot program.
If, however, it was the intention of the Commission at Page 7 of Order No.
28894 to vest in the Energy Efficiency Advisory Group the authority to implement and
determine the funding of a time-of-use metering pilot program, the Company respectfully
petitions for reconsideration. This requirement is not stated in the Commission’s summary
of its Order, nor is it contained in the ordering paragraphs of Order No. 28894.
Idaho Power also requests that the Commission clarify its Order so as to
authorize the deferral of the intervenor funding payment in the amount of $4,749.04.
Respectfully submitted this 11th day of December, 2001.

________________________________
LARRY D. RIPLEY
Attorney for Idaho Power Company
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE, Page 1
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on the 11th day of December, 2001, I served a true
and correct copy of the within and foregoing IDAHO POWER COMPANY’S PETITION
FOR CLARIFICATION OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION
OF ORDER NO. 28894 upon the following named parties and/or interested persons by the
method indicated below, and addressed to the following:

Lisa D. Nordstrom, Esq. x Hand Delivered
Deputy Attorney General U.S. Mail
Idaho Public Utilities Commission Overnight Mail
472 W. Washington Street FAX
P.O. Box 83720
Boise, Idaho 83720-0074

William M. Eddie, Esq. Hand Delivered
Laird J. Lucas, Esq. x U.S. Mail
Land & Water Fund of the Rockies Overnight Mail
P.O. Box 1612 FAX
Boise, Idaho 83701

Sara Denniston, Esq. Hand Delivered
Idaho Rivers United x U.S. Mail
2600 Rose Hill, Suite 207 Overnight Mail
Boise, Idaho 83705 FAX

R. Scott Pasley, Esq. Hand Delivered
J.R. Simplot Company x U.S. Mail
P.O. Box 27 Overnight Mail
Boise, Idaho 83707-0027 FAX

David H. Hawk Hand Delivered
J.R. Simplot Company x U.S. Mail
P.O. Box 27 Overnight Mail
Boise, Idaho 83707-0027 FAX

Peter J. Richardson, Esq. Hand Delivered
Richardson & O’Leary PLLC x U.S. Mail
P.O. Box 1849 Overnight Mail
Eagle, Idaho 83616 FAX

Richard E. Malmgren, Esq. Hand Delivered
Micron Technology, Inc. x U.S. Mail
8000 South Federal Way, MS 507 Overnight Mail
P.O. Box 6 FAX
Boise, Idaho 83707-0006

Sheryl Carter Hand Delivered
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE, Page 2
Senior Policy Analyst x U.S. Mail
Natural Resources Defense Council Overnight Mail
71 Stevenson Street, Suite 1825 FAX
San Francisco, California 94105

______________________________________
LARRY D. RIPLEY