20111104ICIP Objection to IPC.pdf

REGEl D
lOff NOV -4 PM 3: 44~f&:QJLE..Jf PWATTORNEYS AT LAW
Peter Richardson
Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone]
peterCi r ichardso nandoleary. com
P.O. Box 7218 Boise. 10 83707 - 515 N. 27th St. Boise, 10 83702
November 4, 2011
Ms. Jean Jewell
Commission Secretary
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
PO Box 83720
Boise ID 83720-0074
RE: Case No.lPC-E-11-oS
Dear Ms. Jewell:
Enclosed please find one (1) copy of the INDUSTRIAL CUSTOMERS OF
IDAHO POWER'S OBJECTIONS TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST OF
IDAHO POWER COMPANY in the above case. Pursuant to agreement of the
parties, electronic copies have been served on all parties.
i have also enclosed an extra copy to be service-dated and returned to us for
our files. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Ç2.Peter Richardson
RICHARDSON & O'LEARY, PLLC
enc!.
Peter J. Richardson ISB # 3195
Gregory M. Adams ISB # 7454
RICHASON & O'LEARY PLLC
515 N. 27th Street
Boise, Idaho 83702
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
peteraYrichardsonandoleary.com
gregaYrichardsonandolear.com
R.O i:ci:i\lr:l l-_ . l. l "J ~"
2Di I NOV -4 PM 3: 45
Attorneys for the Industral Customers of Idaho Power
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF THE ) CASE NO. IPC-E-ll-08
APPLICATION OF IDAHO POWER )
COMPANY FOR AUTHORITY TO ) INDUSTRIAL CUSTOMERS OF
INCREASE ITS RATES AN CHARGES ) IDAHO POWER'S OBJECTIONS TO
FOR ELECTRIC SERVICE TO ITS ) THE FIRST PRODUCTION
CUSTOMERS IN TH STATE OF IDAHO ) REQUEST OF IDAHO POWER
Pursuat to Rile 225.03 of the Riles of Procedure of the Idaho Public Utilties
Commission (the "Commission"), the Industral Customers of Idao Power ("ICIP") hereby files
its Objections to the First Production Request ofIdaho Power Company ("Idaho Power" or the
"Company"). Specifically, as set forth below, ICIP objects in whole or in par to Request Nos. 2,
3,4,5,6,9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.2: Of the ICIP members listed in response to Request
for Production No.1, please list the ICIP members that are among the paries that are actively
paricipating in Case No. IPC-E-II-08.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.2
ICIP objects to Request NO.2 on the grounds of relevance. The inormation requested is not
likely to lead to information that will make any material factu issue more or less likely
regarding whether the facilties charge is fair, just and reasonable.
ICIP also objects on the ground that Request NO.2 is vague because it does not define "actively
paricipating. "
ICIP also objects on the grounds of attorney-client privilege. Communications between ICIP
members and ICIP's attorneys in formulating a position and filings in Idao Power's general rate
case are privileged. Request NO.2 asks for privileged communcations.
Finally, the ICIP objects pursuat to Rile 225(b) of the IPUC Rules of Procedure which provides
that "Production requests or wrtten interrogatories should not be used to obta statements of
opinion or policy not previously wrtten or published." The ICIP has no written statement of
policy or opinion as to which of its members are actively paricipating in Case No. IPC-E-II-08.
OBJECTIONS TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST OF IDAHO POWER
IPC-E-II-08
PAGE 2
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.3: Of the ICIP members listed in response to Request
for Production No.1, please provide a list ofICIP members that are curently paying a facilities
charge to Idaho Power.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.3
ICIP objects to Request NO.3 on the grounds of relevance. The information requested is not
likely to lead to information that will make any material factul issue more or less likely
regarding whether the facilities charge is fair, just and reasonable.
ICIP also objects on the ground that Request NO.3 is burdensome. Idaho Power possesses the
information requested, and requiring ICIP to compile such data in a request for production is
burdensome.
Finally, the ICIP objects because no such list exists as it is not previously written or published
pursuat to Rule 225(a).
OBJECTIONS TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST OF IDAHO POWER
IPC-E-II-08
PAGE 3
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.4: Of the ICIP members listed in response to Request
for Production No.1, please list which members support the modification to the curent
Commission-approved facilities charge methodology.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.4
ICIP objects to Request NO.4 on the grounds of relevance. The inormation requested is not
likely to lead to information that will make any material factu issue more or less likely
regarding whether the facilities charge is fair, just and reasonable.
ICIP also objects on the grounds of attorney-client privilege. Communcations between ICIP
members and ICIP's attorneys in formu1ating a position and filings in Idaho Power's general rate
case are privileged. Request NO.4 asks for privileged communcations regarding which
members do or do not support a paricu1ar position.
Finally, the ICIP objects because no such list has been compiled and it is not previously written
or published pursuant to Rule 225(a).
OBJECTIONS TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST OF IDAHO POWER
IPC-E-II-08
PAGE 4
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.5: Of the ICIP members listed in response to Request
for Production No.1, please list which members wou1d agree to purchase facilities owned by
Idaho Power that are curently subject to the facilties charge if Idaho Power agreed to sell those
facilities but if Idaho Power did not offer to maintain those facilities.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.5
ICIP objects to Request NO.5 on the grounds of relevance. The information requested is not
likely to lead to information that will make any material factual issue more or less likely
regarding whether the facilities charge is fair, just and reasonable.
ICIP also objects on the ground that Request NO.5 is vague because it does not describe the
terms under which the sale would tae place. Even if it were required to do so, there is no way
for ICIP to compile the requested information without describing for ICIP members the terms of
the sale, e.g., at fair market value, depreciated book value per individual piece of equipment,
whether there wil be a credit to customers who have been paying for fully depreciated
equipment, etc.
ICIP also objects on the grounds that the requested information does not exist and hence canot
be produced. See Rule 225(a)
ICIP also objects on the grounds of attorney-client privilege. Communcations between ICIP
members and ICIP's attorneys in formu1ating a position and filings in Idao Power's general rate
case are privileged. To the extent Request NO.5 asks for privileged communications regarding
which members would elect to purchase equipment if given the option, ICIP objects.
OBJECTIONS TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST OF IDAHO POWER
IPC-E-II-08
PAGE 5
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.6: Please describe the ICIP's decision makng process
generally in proceedings before the Commission, and in paricular, ICIP's decision making
process among the members actively involved in Case No. IPC-E-II-08.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.6
ICIP objects to Request NO.6 on the grounds of relevance. The information requested is not
likely to lead to information that will make any material factu issue more or less likely
regarding whether the facilities charge is fair, just and reasonable.
ICIP also objects on the ground that Request NO.6 is vague because it does not define "decision
making process among members actively involved in Case No. IPC-E-II-08."
ICIP also objects on the grounds of attorney-client privilege. Communcations between ICIP
members and ICIP's attorneys in formulating a position and fiings in Idaho Power's general rate
case are privileged. Request No.5 asks for privileged communcations.
OBJECTIONS TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST OF IDAHO POWER
IPC-E-II-08
PAGE 6
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.9: Please describe your understanding of whether
paragraph 11 of the Stipulation submitted in Case No. IPC-E-II-08 wou1d require an increase to
the rates and/or a direct charge to other Schedule 19 customers if Idaho Power were to
experience a revenue loss in the event it reduced the amount of the facilties charge for Simplot
and/or relinquished ownership to Simplot of Idaho Power owned facilities that were subject to
the facilties charge.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.9
ICIP objects to Request NO.9 on the ground that it calls for a legal conclusion. Without
providing a legal interpretation of the stipulation, ICIP is unable to respond and therefore objects.
OBJECTIONS TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST OF IDAHO POWER
IPC-E-II-08
PAGE 7
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 10: Please describe how ICIP envisions
implementation of its proposed changes to Idaho Power's facilties charge provisions.
Specifically address ownership of facilties, the monthly facilties charge rates, and any
varations between plant locations/equipment/rate classes, replacement of failed equipment,
customer-requested installation of new or additional equipment, and operation and maintenance
responsibilties. Please produce any and all workpapers supporting this implementation plan.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 10
ICIP objects to Request No. 10 to the extent that it calls for ICIP to conduct new analysis not
already conducted, or included in its testimony. ICIP will respond to Request No. 10 on due date
to the extent it is able without producing new work papers or analysis, without waiving this
objection.
OBJECTIONS TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST OF IDAHO POWER
IPC- E-II-08
PAGE 8
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 11: Please describe in detail how ICIP proposes to
calcu1ate each cost component of the facilities charge based on its recommendations provided in
the case. Please provide all workpapers, including electronic spreadsheets, of all such
calculations.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 11
ICIP objects to Request No. 11 to the extent that it calls for ICIP to conduct new analysis not
already conducted, or included in its testimony. ICIP will respond to Request No. 11 on due date
to the extent it is able without producing new work papers or analysis, without waiving this
objection.
OBJECTIONS TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST OF IDAHO POWER
IPC-E-II-08
PAGE 9
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 12: Is ICIP aware of any discrepancies between its
customers and the Company concernng mixed ownership of facilties that are installed beyond
the Company's point of delivery? If so, please explain the natue of each of those discrepancies;
i.e., tracking, accounting, ownership, removal, and replacement. Please provide all workpapers
showing these discrepancies.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 12
The ICIP does not have "customers." It is assumed for puroses of this question that the word
"customer" actuly means member of the ICIP.
ICIP objects to Request No. 12 on the ground that it is vague to extent that it does not describe
which customers for which Idaho Power requests ICIP to explain the natue of such
discrepancies.
ICIP also objects on the ground that ICIP has no way to reasonably obtain information regarding
the Company's records for its distrbution facilities equipment ownership for customers other
than ICIP members.
ICIP also objects on the ground that Request No. 12 requests information not already compiled
by ICIP and wou1d be burdensome to produce. To describe the nature of such discrepancies for
ICIP member companies, ICIP wou1d first need to compile lists of such discrepancies for each
individua ICIP member. ICIP objects because such lists of discrepancies in mixed ownership
have not been compiled by ICIP.
OBJECTIONS TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST OF IDAHO POWER
IPC-E-II-08
PAGE 10
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 13: IfIdaho Power were to sell Company-owned
facilties installed beyond its point of delivery, please explain ICIP's recommendation for
determining a sales price that satisfies the requirements ofIdaho Code § 61-328. Specifically,
describe how ICIP's sales price recommendation is: (1) in the public interest, (2) that the costs
and rates for supplying service will not increase by reason of such transaction, and (3) that the
acquiring customer has both the intent and abilty to operate and maintain the utility assets.
Please provide all files and workpapers supporting your recommendation.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 13
ICIP objects to Request No. 13 on the ground that it calls for a legal conclusion.
ICIP also objects to the extent that ths Request calls for production of new workpapers and
analysis not already within ICIP's possession.
ICIP will respond to Request No. 13 on due date to the extent it is able without producing legal
conclusions, new work papers or analysis, and without waiving ths objection.
OBJECTIONS TO TH FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST OF IDAHO POWER
IPC-E-I1-08
PAGE 11
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 14: Does ICIP believe that Idao Power's decision
whether or not to provide maintenance on customer-owned equipment is a regu1ated business
activity subject to the ries of the Commssion?
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 14
ICIP objects to Request No. 14 on the ground that it calls for a legal conclusion. ICIP canot
respond without providing a legal conclusion.
OBJECTIONS TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST OF IDAHO POWER
IPC-E-II-08
PAGE 12
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 15: If the ICIP's answer is "yes" to Request for
Production No. 14, please provide all statutory and/or Commission ries supporting this answer.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 15
ICIP objects to Request No. 15 on the ground that it calls for a legal conclusion. ICIP canot
respond without providing a legal conclusion.
OBJECTIONS TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST OF IDAHO POWER
IPC- E-II-08
PAGE 13
RICHASON & O'LEARY, PLLC
OBJECTIONS TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST OF IDAHO POWER
IPC-E-II-08
PAGE 14
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on the 4th day of November, 2011, a tre and correct copy of the
within and foregoing OBJECTION TO IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S FIRST REQUEST
FOR PRODUCTION TO THE INDUSTRIAL CUSTOMERS OF IDAHO POWER IN CASE
NO.IPC-E-II-08 was served in the maner shown to:
Ms. Jean Jewell
Comms~on Secret
Idao Public Utilities Commssion
POBox83720
Boise, ID 83720-0074
jean.jewellwuc.idaho.gov
~Hand Delivery
~ U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
X Electronic Mail
Lisa D Nordstrom
Jason B Wiliams
Idaho Power Company
PO Box 70
Boise, Idaho 83707-0070
InordstromaYidahopower .com
jwillamsaYidahopower.com
_ Hand Delivery
_U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
-- Electronic Mail
Donovan Waler
Greg Said
Idaho Power Company
POBox 70
Boise, Idaho 83707-0070
dwalkeraYidahopower .com
gsaidaYidahopower .com
_ Hand Delivery
_U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
lLElectronic Mail
Eric L. Olsen
Racine, Olson, Nye, Budge &
Bailey, Charered
P.O. Box 1391; 201 E. Center
Pocatello, Idaho 83204-1391
elo(gacinelaw.net
_Hand Delivery
_U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimle
X Electronic Mail
Anthony Yanel
29814 Lake Road
Bay Vilage, Ohio 44140
tony~yanei.net
_Hand Delivery
_U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
X- Electronic Mail
Donald L Howell, II
Karl Klein
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
472 W Washington
Boise ID 83702
don.howellwuc.idaho.gov
karl.kleincmpuc.idaho.gov
_ Hand Delivery
_ U.S. Mail, postae pre-paid
Facsimle
X- Electronic Mail
Arur Perr Bruder
US, Deparent of Energy
1000 Independence Ave SW
Washigton DC 20585
Arur.bruderWig.doe.gov
_ Hand Delivery
_ U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
X Electronic Mail
Dwight Etheridge
Exeter Associates, Inc.
5565 Sterrett Place Ste 310
Columbia MD 21044
detheridgeaYexeterassociates.com
_ Hand Delivery
_ U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
g Electronic Mail
Steven A Porter
Electrcity & Fossil Energy
US Deparent of Energy
steven.porterWig.doe.gov
(email only)
_ Hand Delivery
_ U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
g Electronic Mail
John R Hamond Jr
Batt Fisher Pusch & Alderman LLP
PO Box 1308
Boise ID 83701
jrhcmbattsher.com
_ Hand Delivery
_ U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
g Electronic Mail
KurJBoehm
Boehm Kur & Lowery
36 E Seventh St Ste 1510
Cincinati OH 45202
kboehmcmbkllawfrm.com
_ Hand Delivery
_ U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
g Electronic Mail
Brad M Purdy
CAPA
2019 N 17th St
Boise ID 83702
bmpurdyWiotmail.com
_ Hand Delivery
_ U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
x. Electronic Mail
Richard E Malmgren
Micron Technology Inc
800 South Federal Way
Boise ID 83716
remalmgrencmmicron.com
_ Hand Delivery
_ U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
X Electronic Mail
Mar V York
Thorvald A Nelson
Mark A Davidson
Fred Schmdt
Holland & Har
6380 Fiddlers Green Circle Ste 500
Greenwood Vilage CO 80111
myorkWiollandhar.com
tnelsonaYhollandhar.com
madavidsonWiollandhar.com
fschmidtWiollandhard.com
_ Hand Delivery
_ U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
X Electronic Mail
Benjamin Otto
Idaho Conservation League
PO Box 844
Boise ID 83701
bottocmidahoconservation.org
_ Hand Delivery
_ U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
X Electronic Mail
Ken Miler
Snake River Allance
PO Box 1731
Boise ID 83701
kmileraYsnakeriveralliance.org
_ Hand Delivery
_ U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
X Electronic Mail
Kevin Higgins
Energy Strategies
215 S State St Ste 200
Salt Lake City UT 84111
khgginscmenergystrat.com
_ Hand Delivery
_ U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
X Electronic Mail
Nancy Hirsh, Policy Director
NW Energy Coalition
811 1st Ave Ste 305
Seatte W A 98104
Nancywwenergy.org
_ Hand Delivery
_ U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
Facsimile
X Electronic Mail)dJf~L Richson