20070907final_order_no_30418.pdf

Office of the Secretary
Service Date
September 7, 2007
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF
VISTA CORPORATION FOR AN ORDER
REVISING AVISTA CORPORATION'
OBLIGATIONS TO ENTER INTO
CONTRACTS TO PURCHASE ENERGY
GENERATED BY WIND-POWERED SMALL
POWER GENERATION FACILITIES
ORDER NO. 30418
CASE NO. A VU-07-
On April 2, 2007, A vista Corporation (A vista; Company) filed an Application with
the Idaho Public Utilities Commission (Commission) requesting a change in the Company
PURP A obligations for wi~d QFs. A vista proposes a raising of the cap on entitlement
published avoided cost rates for wind-powered small power generation facilities that are
qualifying facilities (QFs) under Sections 201 and 210 of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies
Act of 1978 (PURP A) from the current level of 100 kW to 10 average megawatts per month (10
aMW), subject to the following condition, among others:
5. Clarifying the rules governing the entitlement to published rates to
prevent all QFs, whether wind or non-wind, capable of delivering more
than 10 aMW per month from structuring or restructuring into smaller
projects solely for the purpose of qualifying for the published avoided
cost rates; and
The Commission in this Order denies the Company s requested rule change
regarding published rate eligibility.
Published Rate Eligibility - Disaggregation
A vista contends that wind projects are uniquely able to reconfigure themselves into
various legal ownerships solely for economic reasons, without disturbing or affecting in any way
site or structural design. In some circumstances, other generating technologies, it notes, may
have a similar capability. Projects that are under common ownership, Avista contends, should
not be able to reconfigure themselves legally for the sole purpose of qualifying for published
avoided costs in Idaho.
Avista asks that the approach recommended by Idaho Power in Case No. IPC-07-
04 be applied to Avista s purchases as well. Additionally, Avista contends that a uniform
approach among Idaho jurisdictional utilities is useful. It would avoid unneeded incentives for
ORDER NO. 30418
favoring one utility over another, unrelated to the fundamental economic differences reflected in
the avoided costs.
On June 28 , 2007, the Commission issued a Notice of Modified Procedure regarding
the issue of disaggregation and established a July 27 2007 comment deadline. Comments were
filed by Commission Staff and a supporter of renewable energy. Both commenters oppose the
Company s disaggregation proposal.
Staff repeats the comments it filed in Case No. IPC-07-04. Avista provides no
additional support for the proposed rule. Staff believes that rather than accomplishing its
intended objective, the proposed disaggregation rule will instead simply result in more creative
QF ownership arrangements.
Commission Findings
The Commission has reviewed and considered the filings of record in Case No.
A VU-07-02 regarding the Company s proposed change in published rate eligibility rules. We
have also reviewed our related Order No. 30415 in Idaho Power Case No. IPC-07-04.
continue to find it reasonable to process this matter pursuant to Modified Procedure, IDAP A
31.01.01.204.
A vista in this case requests that it be accorded the same treatment we grant to Idaho
Power. In Order No. 30415 , we found that Idaho Power had failed to persuade the Commission
that there was a need to modify its rules for published rate eligibility to preclude disaggregation.
A vista offers no additional evidence that a change is needed.
We do not share the contention of Idaho Power and A vista that without change abuse
will occur and the public interest will not be served. It is a change that we find would encourage
and might actually promote gamesmanship. On the basis of the established record we find no
reason to change the eligibility criteria for published rates to require a standard different than
FERC QF status requirements.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The Commission has jurisdiction over Avista Corporation, an electric utility, and the
issues presented in Case No. A VU-07-02 pursuant to the authority and power granted it under
Title 61 of the Idaho Code and the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (PURPA).
ORDER NO. 30418
The Commission has authority under PURP A and the implementing regulations of
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to set avoided costs, to order electric
utilities to enter into fixed term obligations for the purchase of energy from qualified facilities
(QFs) and to implement FERC rules.
ORDER
In consideration of the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED and the Commission
does hereby deny Avista s proposal to clarify rules regarding published rate eligibility and
disaggregation.
THIS IS A FINAL ORDER. Any person interested in this Order may petition for
reconsideration within twenty-one (21) days of the service date of this Order. Within seven (7)
days after any person has petitioned for reconsideration, any other person may cross-petition for
reconsideration. See Idaho Code 9 61-626.
DONE by Order of the Idaho Public Utilities Commission at Boise, Idaho this
-fA
day of September 2007.
LfA:J,.MARSHA H. SMITH, COMMISSIONER
ATTEST:
Commission Secretary
bls/O:A VU-O7-02 sw
ORDER NO. 30418