20221123Reconsideration_Order_No_35605.pdf

ORDER NO. 35605 1
Office of the Secretary
Service Date
November 23, 2022
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION

IN THE MATTER OF NOAH KINNE’S
FORMAL COMPLAINT AGAINST AVISTA
CORPORATION
)
)
)
)
)
)
CASE NO. AVU-E-22-08

ORDER NO. 35605

On August 20, 2021, Noah Kinne contacted the Idaho Public Utilities Commission
(“Commission”) alleging, among other things, that Avista Corporation (“Company” or “Avista”)
failed to comply with its vegetation management policy. After informal proceedings proved
unsatisfactory, on March 7, 2022, Mr. Kinne filed a formal Complaint with the Commission.
Mr. Kinne claimed that on or about July 13, 2021, a tree fell on Avista’s power line just
outside of Sandpoint, Idaho. Mr. Kinne stated that the tree fell south from railroad property, on
the west side of a farm access road, and that the tree downed a power line, which started a fire
that caused damage to Mr. Kinne’s Combine Harvester. Mr. Kinne claimed that, based on
Avista’s negligence, the fire resulted in the total loss of Mr. Kinne’s farm equipment worth
approximately $8,000. Mr. Kinne claimed that had the Company paid closer attention to the state
of vegetation surrounding its power lines, the fire would not have occurred because the Company
would have noticed the rotted tree and removed it.
In its informal proceeding response, the Company claimed that: (1) the downed tree that
caused the brush fire was outside of the Company’s utility corridor and therefore, not within the
scope of the Company’s vegetation management; (2) there was no evidence of negligence, or
improper or incorrect work or actions, on the part of the Company; and, (3) the tree was visibly
healthy, and did not pose any visible risks to the power lines.
FINAL ORDER NO. 35561
On October 13, 2022, the Commission issued Final Order No. 35561 dismissing the
Complaint. Order No. 35561 provides:
After reviewing the record and submitted materials, the Commission
cannot find that Mr. Kinne has presented a specific prayer for relief that the
Commission may grant. The Commission does not dictate the methods by which
the Company conducts its vegetation management program, and at this point Mr.
Kinne has only submitted general conflicting claims that the Company has both
not done the inspection, and also done the inspection incorrectly.
ORDER NO. 35605 2
Further, Mr. Kinne has not alleged that the tree in question was on
property that was subject to the Company’s inspection; Mr. Kinne has not
submitted any argument or authority to show that the Company did not comply
with the rules and regulations cited in the Complaint, and at this time the only
support Mr. Kinne has submitted for the conclusory claim that the Company
should have seen the tree in question is insufficient, as reasoned above, to support
his claim. Thus, Mr. Kinne’s Formal Complaint is dismissed.
Order No. 35561 at 4-5.
PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION
On October 25, 2022, Mr. Kinne filed a letter with the Commission (“Petition for
Reconsideration”) “call[ing] the matter back into question.” Mr. Kinne took issue with some of
the analysis done by the Commission’s Legal Staff and provided additional argument on the
issue.
Mr. Kinne argued that “[r]equesting better practices for public safety is within the
jurisdiction of the commission. I did make mention that it be investigated as to whether the
management rules were being complied with.” Pet. Recon. at 2. Further, Mr. Kinne argued that
“[s]ufficient evidence was provided to show that Avista is not abiding by NESC provisions.” Id.
Specifically, that “[t]he actual dates of the pictures can be given and confirmed with the original
images. Terry Oliver is a forester registered with Bonner County in Idaho. For the matter of
questioning the judgment of Terry Oliver I am including a letter from another forester that was
present the day of the event.” Id. Mr. Kinne submitted an unsigned letter that he argues is from a
forester name John Kinne.
Finally, Mr. Kinne argued that:
In the informal proceedings it was made known that the tree was on Railroad
property and the agreement Avista has holds them responsible for all hazards no
matter of distance. The railroad tried to contact Avista but Avista refused to
respond on the matter. The railroad stated that if Avista believes they have no
responsibility for the tree because of the distance from the line they must prove it
with proper documentation. This has never been done. Everything that I have
submitted to the commission shows that Avista is not operating in a manner that is
preferential or just.
Id. Mr. Kinne concluded that “if a utility company failing to address known hazards and
providing false information to the public can’t be seen as a public safety matter that needs
rectified then the public of Idaho has no hope for ever having a just utility commission.” Id. at 3.

ORDER NO. 35605 3
COMMISSION FINDINGS AND DECISION
The Commission finds that the petition does not meet the substantive requirements for a
petition for reconsideration. Rule 331 provides:
Petitions for reconsideration must set forth specifically the ground or grounds
why the petitioner contends that the order or any issue decided in the order is
unreasonable, unlawful, erroneous or not in conformity with the law, and a
statement of the nature and quantity of evidence or argument the petitioner will
offer if reconsideration is granted.
IDAPA 31.01.01.331.01 (emphasis added). Further, “the petition . . . must state whether the
petitioner . . . requests reconsideration by evidentiary hearing, written briefs, comments, or
interrogatories.” IDAPA 31.01.01.331.03.
In this case Mr. Kinne has not set forth any specific grounds for reconsideration, nor has
he indicated the nature and quantity of evidence he would offer to show Order No. 35561 was
unreasonable, unlawful, erroneous, or not in conformity with the law. Further, Mr. Kinne does
not request reconsideration by evidentiary hearing, written briefs, comments, or interrogatories.
With respect to the submitted evidence, Mr. Kinne argues that the date of his submitted
photos is not relevant, but that it can be established; however, Mr. Kinne does not establish that
date for the Commission to consider. Mr. Kinne attempts to support the submitted testimony of
Terry Oliver, which failed to establish any foundation for Mr. Oliver’s knowledge, with the
submission of an unsigned letter alleged to be from John Kinne. This new letter fails to establish
any foundation for John Kinne’s knowledge, nor does Mr. Kinne provide any argument that this
new letter provides support for Mr. Oliver’s letter.
Finally, Mr. Kinne now submits an allegation that the tree in question was on railroad
property, but that there is an agreement between the railroad and Avista that holds Avista liable
for all damage regardless of distance or location of the tree from the pole. Mr. Kinne does not
submit any evidence of this agreement, and Mr. Kinne did not argue this agreement in his
original complaint. Thus, Mr. Kinne is now raising a new issue on reconsideration that was not
presented to, or considered by, the Commission in its previous order.
Pursuant to Rule 332, “[g]rounds for reconsideration or issues on reconsideration that are
not supported by specific explanation may be dismissed.” IDAPA 31.01.01.332. Based upon the
petition’s lack of specific grounds for reconsideration and supporting argument, the Petition for
Reconsideration is denied.
ORDER NO. 35605 4
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Petition for Reconsideration is denied.
THIS IS A FINAL ORDER DENYING RECONSIDERATION. Any party aggrieved by
this Order, or other final or interlocutory Orders previously issued in this case, may appeal to the
Supreme Court of Idaho within forty-two (42) days pursuant to the Public Utilities Law and the
Idaho Appellate Rules. Idaho Code § 61-627; I.A.R. 14.
DONE by Order of the Idaho Public Utilities Commission at Boise, Idaho this 23rd day
of November 2022.

ERIC ANDERSON, PRESIDENT

JOHN CHATBURN, COMMISSIONER

JOHN R. HAMMOND JR., COMMISSIONER

ATTEST:

Jan Noriyuki
Commission Secretary

I:\Legal\ELECTRIC\AVU-E-22-08 Kinne\orders\AVUE2208_FO_Recon_cb.doc