20091006notice_of_scheduling_order_no_30922.pdf

Office of the Secretary
Service Date
October 6, 2009
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF A REVIEW OF THE
SURROGATE AVOIDABLE RESOURCE
(SAR) METHODOLOGY FOR
CALCULATING PUBLISHED AVOIDED
COST RATES
NOTICE OF
FURTHER SCHEDULING
CASE NO. GNR-09-
ORDER NO. 30922
On August 6, 2009, the Idaho Public Utilities Commission (Commission) opened a
generic docket (Case No. GNR-09-03) to assess the continued viability of the Commission
existing proxy unit or surrogate avoided resource (SAR) methodology for calculating published
avoided cost rates. Specifically, the Commission noticed its intent to explore the continued
reasonableness of using published avoided cost rates as presently calculated for all QF resource
types.
As reflected in the Commission s August 6, 2009 Notice, the appropriateness of a
single avoided cost SAR methodology for published rates is being re-examined in the context of
PURP A and FERC requirements and the comparative and different generation and operation
capabilities of resources being offered to Idaho utilities, e., capacity factor, dispatchability,
intermittency.
To establish a basis for discussion and analysis and to determine the nature and scope
of further procedure, the Commission solicited input from Avista, Idaho Power, and PacifiCorp
and other interested parties. Specifically, the Commission sought answers to questions posed in
its Notice. The deadline for filing written comments was September 18, 2009. Timely
comments were filed by Idaho Power, Avista, PacifiCorp, Idaho Wind Farms, Sagebrush Energy,
and Commission Staff. Idaho Forest Group filed a Motion on September 21 , 2009, for late
acceptance of comments and concurrence with comments filed by Sagebrush Energy. RP 56.
Idaho Forest Group contends that the late filing of the concurrence will not prejudice the rights
of any party or cause undue delay to this proceeding. The Commission agrees and finds it
reasonable to grant Idaho Forest Group s Motion and accept its comments.
On September 29 2009, the Exergy Development Group filed reply comments. No
schedule for reply comments was established by the Commission. Exergy filed no motion
NOTICE OF FURTHER SCHEDULING
ORDER NO. 30922
requesting that its comments be accepted. The Commission is informed that if Exergy
comments are to be considered, Idaho Power requests the opportunity to file sur-reply to respond
to factual allegations and legal issues raised by Exergy in its reply brief. This docket being in the
nature of an exploration or reassessment of the SAR methodology, the Commission has no desire
to reject the comments of Exergy as being untimely and outside the schedule of comments
solicited. Accordingly, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that the Commission finds it
reasonable to establish the following further scheduling in Case No. GNR-09-02:
Friday, October 16 2009 Sur-reply deadline (to Exergy Reply Comments)
ORDER
For reasons set forth above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion of Idaho
Forest Group for permission to late-file is granted.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the foregoing scheduling be adopted.
DONE by Order of the Idaho Public Utilities Commission at Boise, Idaho this 5-rA
day of October 2009.
(l/ KEMPTON SIDENT
ARSHA H. SMITH, COMMISSIONER
Out of the Office on this Date
MACK A. REDFORD, COMMISSIONER
ATTEST:
J a D. Jewel mmission Secretary
bls/O:GNR-O9-03 sw2
NOTICE OF FURTHER SCHEDULING
ORDER NO. 30922