HomeMy WebLinkAbout20171010min.pdf
IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
MINUTES OF DECISION MEETING
October 19, 2017 – 1:30 P.M.
In attendance were Commissioners Paul Kjellander and Eric Anderson. Kristine Raper was
excused. Commissioner Kjellander called the meeting to order.
The first order of business was APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM PREVIOUS MEETING
on Tuesday, October 10, 2017. The Commission voted unanimously to approve the minutes as
written.
The second order of business was CONSENT AGENDA:
2. Nancy Ashcraft’s October 5, 2017, Decision Memorandum re: Updating List of
Regulated Utilities for Assessment.
3. Brandon Karpen’s October 6, 2017, Decision Memorandum re: Further Continuance of
the Stay of Proceedings; Case No. EAG-W-15-01.
There were no questions and Commissioner Kjellander made a motion to approve Staff’s
recommendations for items 2 and 3 on the Consent Agenda. A vote was taken on the motion and
it carried unanimously.
The next order of business was MATTERS IN PROGRESS:
4. Daphne Huang’s October 3, 2017, Decision Memorandum re: Idaho Power’s
Application to Approve or reject Energy Sales Agreement with Shorock Hydro, Inc. for
Rock Creek Hydro Facility; Case No. IPC-E-17-14. (Held over from 10/5/17 Decision
Meeting)
Ms. Huang reviewed her Decision Memo; she stated that this is an energy sale agreement. The
parties in the case, Shorock Hydro and Idaho Power are in agreement on the contract with the
exception of two provisions; they agreed to have this case processed by modified procedure and
they wish to have their arguments over their provisions addressed in comments.
Ms. Huang stated, she placed this on the Agenda and consulted with Staff and with Mr. Louis,
the PUC head Engineer about how they would like to process it and Mr. Louis said he wanted to
hear from Shorock Hydro about what their arguments where before Staff prepared their response.
Ms. Huang stated this is a process that we have used in recent cases and Randy Lobb is available
to answer questions about this process if the Commissioners have any questions for him about
that process.
Commissioner Kjellander asked if there were any comments or questions.
Commissioner Raper commented she was concerned, because this is atypical for Staff to
comment simultaneously with the Company. She understands that the way this case is situated,
in order for Staff to have anything rather than a denial based on past precedence, they would like
to at least consider Shorock’s position on why the contract should be changed. She is in
agreement with the way this is now being processed, she just wanted to be clear that,
procedurally, this is not a typical way to process a case.
Commissioner Kjellander made a motion that the Commission process this case under Modified
Procedure with Staff’s proposed deadlines. A vote was taken on the motion and it carried
unanimously.
There was no further business before the Commission and Commissioner Kjellander adjourned
the meeting.
____________________________________ ______________________________
COMMISSION SECRETARY DATE OF APPROVAL