The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20130123Reply.pdfARKooSH EIGUREN tom.arkoosh@,wlawlobby.com ?Oi3JAP423 PM 3:5J January 22, Ms. Jean Jewell Commission Secretary Idaho Public Utilities Commission 472 W. Washington Boise, ID 83702 Re: GNR-E- 11-03 Dear Ms. Jewell: Enclosed for filing in the above referenced case, please find an original and seven copies of the Reply of North Side Canal Company, Twin Falls Canal Company, Big Wood Canal Company, and American Falls Reservoir District No. 2 to Idaho Power Company's Response to Petition for Reconsideration, Response to Petition for Clarification, and Cross-Petition for Reconsideration. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Please contact our office if you have any questions. Sincerely, ARKOOSH EIGUREN PLLC eci Legal Assistant Iemc Enclosure Cc: Client 802 West Bannock Street, Suite 900, P.O. Box 2900, Boise, ID 83701 Tel: (208) 343-5105 1 Fax: (208) 343-5456 C. Thomas Arkoosh, ISB No. 2253 J ARKOOSH EIGUREN, PLLC 802 W. Bannock Street, Suite 900 P.O. Box 2900 (L Boise, Idaho 83701-2598 Telephone: (208) 343-5105 Facsimile: (208) 343-5456 E-mail: tom.arkoosh@aelawlobby.com ') '. LIJ. u 1:9 :;sc Attorneys for Twin Falls Canal Company, North Side Canal Company, Big Wood Canal Company and American Falls Reservoir District No. 2 BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION IN THE MATTER OF THE COMMISSION'S REVIEW OF PURPA QF CONTRACT PROVISION INCLUDING THE SUBROGATE AVOIDED RESOURCE (SAR) AND INTEGRATED RESOURCE PLANNING (IRP) METHODOLOGIES FOR CALCULATING PUBLISHED AVOIDED COST RATES. Case No. GNR-E-1 1-03 REPLY OF NORTH SIDE CANAL COMPANY, TWIN FALLS CANAL COMPANY, BIG WOOD CANAL COMPANY, AND AMERICAN FALLS RESERVOIR DISTRICT NO.2 TO IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION, RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR CLARIFICATION, AND CROSS-PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION COME NOW Twin Falls Canal Company, North Side Canal Company, Big Wood Canal Company, and American Falls Reservoir District #2 (collectively, "Companies"), and hereby reply to Idaho Power Company's Response to Petition for Reconsideration, Response to Petition for Clarification, and Cross-Petition for Reconsideration. REPLY OF NORTH SIDE CANAL COMPANY, TWIN FALLS CANAL COMPANY, BIG WOOD CANAL COMPANY, AND AMERICAN FALLS RESERVOIR DISTRICT NO.2 TO IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION, RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR CLARIFICATION, AND CROSS-PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION -1 I. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND The Idaho Public Utilities Commission ("Commission") in this instant case issued its Order No. 32697 on December 18, 2012, on a plethora of issues concerning the operation of Public Utility Regulatory Policy Act Qualifying Facilities ("PURPA QFs") in the State of Idaho. On or about January 8, 2013, Intervenor Idaho Power Company ("Idaho Power") filed Idaho Power Company's Petition for Clarification and/or Reconsideration ("Idaho Power Petition"). In the Idaho Power Petition, Idaho Power identified four issues for review by the Commission. Idaho Power's Issue No. 1 concerned the Surrogate Avoided Resource ("SAR") inputs and methodology. In the Idaho Power Petition, Idaho Power expressly limited its plea to the Commission to a request for transparency so that all the parties could reproduce the rate schedules attached to Order No. 32697. The Petition concluded as to Issue No. 1: To the extent that the SAR pricing methodology model, with verification of its inputs and variables, is clarified to the extent that the rate calculations in Attachment A can be reproduced by Idaho Power, the Company seeks no other clarification/reconsideration of the SAR pricing methodology here. However, Idaho Power hereby reserves its rights to seek further clarification, reconsideration, or hearing to the extent that the inputs, variables, and, ultimately, the published rates cannot be clarified to the point where the calculations are transparent and can be reproduced. The Company believes it to be to all parties benefit to have the Commission expressly verify upon this Petition for Clarification and/or Reconsideration the details of the SAR published avoided cost rate model utilized by the Order to arrive at the rate charts shown in Attachments A, B, and C. Idaho Power's Petition at p. 4 [Emphasis added.] On or about January 15, 2013, Idaho Power filed Idaho Power Company's Response to Petition for Reconsideration, Response to Petition for Clarification, and Cross-Petition for Reconsideration ("Idaho Power's Response"). In Idaho Power's Response, Idaho Power REPLY OF NORTH SIDE CANAL COMPANY, TWIN FALLS CANAL COMPANY, BIG WOOD CANAL COMPANY, AND AMERICAN FALLS RESERVOIR DISTRICT NO. 2 TO IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION, RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR CLARIFICATION, AND CROSS-PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION -2 responded to its own Petition. Contrary to the affirmative representations of Idaho Power's Petition, its Response to its own Petition now seeks much more than transparency, but in fact a change in the capacity payments paid to Canal Drop Hydro from 100 percent to 67.lpercent. It is respectfully requested that this not be allowed on, alternatively, procedural and substantive grounds. II.PROCEDURAL OBJECTION The percent capacity factor used to calculate Canal Drop Hydro rates was not a matter under reconsideration or clarification by any party, except to the extent that Idaho Power asked for clarification of the SAR inputs, but expressly no more. This limitation warded off any expectation that the 100 percent capacity factor used in the calculation of Canal Drop Hydro rates was at play. Then, Idaho Power sought to respond to its own Petition. This response is neither a cross-petition nor an answer under Rule 331. Rule 331 addresses responses -to petitions by "any other person." Idaho Power is not a third party to its own Petition. In summary, Idaho Power has filed a Petition that quite expressly did not address the 100 percent capacity factor for Canal Drop Hydro, then responds to its own Petition by seeking to raise the very issue it expressly excluded from its Petition. To the extent the Response seeks to affirmatively raise that issue, it is both untimely and done so on a procedure not allowed by Rule 331. Therefore, the consideration of the issue should not be allowed. III.SUBSTANTIVE OBJECTION Based upon page 18 of M. Stokes's Exhibit 3, Idaho Power argues that the capacity factor for Canal Drop Hydro should be 67.1 percent. What the argument fails to point out is the calculation at page 18 is based upon the 90th percentile peak hour capacity factor. In other words, the actual canal drop on peak capacity factor is expected to be greater than this value 90 percent of REPLY OF NORTH SIDE CANAL COMPANY, TWIN FALLS CANAL COMPANY, BIG WOOD CANAL COMPANY, AND AMERICAN FALLS RESERVOIR DISTRICT NO. 2 TO IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION, RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR CLARIFICATION, AND CROSS-PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION -3 the time. The correct capacity factor calculation to use as an input in the SAR model is better explained by Staff witness McHugh. At pages 9, 10, and 11 of her testimony, she sets forth the true avoided cost effect of operating Canal Drop Hydro during Idaho Power's high demand summer season: Q. Are you instituting the "first defecit year" concept exactly as it had been instituted prior to 2002? A. No. The model I recommend identifies years in which a utility is deficient in energy, in capacity, or both. This is based on information from each utility's most recent IRP. If a utility is deficient in energy, then the QF would receive an energy payment. If a utility is not deficient in energy, then the QF would receive an energy payment minus costs for transmission and losses. The previous SAR model did not adjust for transmission and losses. In the recommended model, capacity payments are specific to the resource used by the QF. If a utility is deficient in capacity, then the recommended model examines whether the utility is deficient in summer only, in winter only, or in both seasons. If the utility is deficient in only one season, then the model bases a resource-specific capacity payment on the ability of that resource to contribute during the deficient season's peak. However, if a utility is deficient in both seasons, then the model bases the resource-specific capacity payment on the ability of that resource to contribute during both seasons' peaks. This is the same methodology suggested by Avista. To clarify matters, consider canal drop QFs. Canal drops can contribute 100 percent of their capacity during the summer peak and 0 percent of their capacity during the winter peak. If a utility is only capacity deficient during the summer, then a canal drop QF receives the full capacity payment. However, if a utility is capacity deficient in only the winter or in both the summer and winter, then the canal drop receives no capacity payment. Allowing capacity payments to differ by resource should encourage development of QFs with characteristics of value to the utilities (such as QFs that provide generation during peak hours). Staff concurs with Avista witness Kalich on the basis for capacity payments. In his direct testimony, page 21, lines 5 through 9, Mr. Kalich states: It is not fair to pay one resource with a low capacity factor and an equivalently high on-peak contribution the same per-M" payment as second base load plant operating with a relatively high capacity factor all year round. Using the method, the low capacity factor resource would receive much lower total compensation even though the resource provided the same on-peak capacity benefit to the utility. Direct Testimony of Dr. Cathleen M. McHugh at p. 9, 10, and 11. REPLY OF NORTH SIDE CANAL COMPANY, TWIN FALLS CANAL COMPANY, BIG WOOD CANAL COMPANY, AND AMERICAN FALLS RESERVOIR DISTRICT NO. 2 TO IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION, RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR CLARIFICATION, AND CROSS-PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION -4 IV. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, it is respectfully requested that: 1.The issue of the 100 percent capacity factor for Canal Drop Hydro not be reopened because the same is presented to the Commission untimely and on a procedure not provided for in the Rules; 2.In the event the matter is reconsidered, that the Commission order the retention of the 100 percent canal drop capacity factor for Canal Drop Hydro. Respectfully submitted, DATED this day of January, 2013. ARKOOSH EIGUREN, PLLC C. Thomas Arkoosh Attorneys for Twin Falls Canal Company, North Side Canal Company, Big Wood Canal Company and American Falls Reservoir District No. 2 b REPLY OF NORTH SIDE CANAL COMPANY, TWIN FALLS CANAL COMPANY, BIG WOOD CANAL COMPANY, AND AMERICAN FALLS RESERVOIR DISTRICT NO. 2 TO IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION, RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR CLARIFICATION, AND CROSS-PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION -5 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this day of January, 2013, I served a true and correct copy of the foregoing upon each of the following individuals by causing the same to be delivered by the method and to the addresses indicated below: Jean Jewell, Commission Secretary Idaho Public Utilities Commission 427 W. Washington St. Boise, Idaho 83702 )( U.S. Mail, postage prepaid Hand-Delivered Overnight Mail Facsimile _X_ Via E-Mail jean.iewell(puc.idaho.gov U.S. Mail, postage prepaid Hand-Delivered Overnight Mail Facsimile _X_ Via E-Mail daniel.solander@pacificom.com U.S. Mail, postage prepaid Hand-Delivered Overnight Mail Facsimile _X Via E-Mail ronc2iwil1iamsbradbury.com U.S. Mail, postage prepaid Hand-Delivered Overnight Mail Facsimile Via E-Mail robertapaul08@gmail.com U.S. Mail, postage prepaid Hand-Delivered Overnight Mail Facsimile Via E-Mail greg(mimuralaw.com U.S. Mail, postage prepaid Hand-Delivered Overnight Mail Facsimile _X_ Via E-Mail billpiske@cableone.net Daniel Solander Rocky Mountain Power 201 S. Main St., Ste. 300 Salt Lake City, UT 84111 Ronald L. Williams Williams Bradbury PC 1015W. Hays St. Boise, Idaho 83702 Robert A. Paul Grand View Solar II 15690 Vista circle Desert Hot Springs, CA 92241 R. Greg Femey Mimura Law Offices, PLLC 2176 E. Franklin Rd., Ste. 120 Meridian, Idaho 83642 Bill Piske, Manager Interconnect Solar Development, LLC 1303 E. Carter Boise, Idaho 83706 REPLY OF NORTH SIDE CANAL COMPANY, TWIN FALLS CANAL COMPANY, BIG WOOD CANAL COMPANY, AND AMERICAN FALLS RESERVOIR DISTRICT NO. 2 TO IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION, RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR CLARIFICATION, AND CROSS-PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION -6 Robert D. Kahn, Executive Director Northwest and Intermountain Power Producers Coalition 1117 Minor Ave., Ste. 300 Seattle, WA 98101 Michael G. Andrea Avista Corporation 1411 East Mission Ave. Spokane, WA 99202 U.S. Mail, postage prepaid Hand-Delivered Overnight Mail Facsimile X Via E-Mail rkahn(nippc.org U.S. Mail, postage prepaid Hand-Delivered Overnight Mail Facsimile Dean J. Miller McDevitt & Miller, LLP P.O. Box 2564 Boise, Idaho 83701 Don Sturtevant, Energy Director J.R. Simplot Company P.O. Box 27 Boise, Idaho 83707 _X_ Via E-Mail michael.andrea@avistacorD.com U.S. Mail, postage prepaid Hand-Delivered Overnight Mail Facsimile _X_ Via E-Mail joemcdevitt-miller.com chas@mcdevitt-miller.com U.S. Mail, postage prepaid Hand-Delivered Overnight Mail Facsimile Via E-Mail don.sturtevan@simplot.com James Carkulis, Managing Member Exergy Development Group of ID, LLC 802 W. Bannock St., Ste. 1200 Boise, Idaho 83702 M.J. Humphries Blue Ribbon Energy LLC 4515 S. Ammon Rd. Ammon, Idaho 83406 Arron F. Jepson Blue Ribbon Energy LLC 10660 South 540 East Sandy, UT 84070 U.S. Mail, postage prepaid Hand-Delivered Overnight Mail Facsimile X Via E-Mail icarkulis,exergydevelopment.com U.S. Mail, postage prepaid Hand-Delivered Overnight Mail Facsimile _X_ Via E-Mail blueribbonenergy@gmail.com U.S. Mail, postage prepaid Hand-Delivered Overnight Mail Facsimile _X_ Via E-Mail arronesi(ao.com REPLY OF NORTH SIDE CANAL COMPANY, TWIN FALLS CANAL COMPANY, BIG WOOD CANAL COMPANY, AND AMERICAN FALLS RESERVOIR DISTRICT NO. 2 TO IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION, RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR CLARIFICATION, AND CROSS-PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION -7 Brian Olmstead, General Manager U.S. Mail, postage prepaid Twin Falls Canal Company Hand-Delivered P.O. Box 326 Overnight Mail Twin Falls, Idaho 83303 Facsimile Via E-Mail olmstead@tfcanal.com John R. Lowe U.S. Mail, postage prepaid Consultant to Renewable Energy Hand-Delivered Coalition Overnight Mail 12050 SW Tremont St. Facsimile Portland, OR 97225 _X_ Via E-Mail jravenesanmarcos(yahoo.com Donovan E. Walker U.S. Mail, postage prepaid Jason B. Williams Hand-Delivered Idaho Power Company Overnight Mail P.O. Box 70 Facsimile Boise, Idaho 83707-0700 X Via E-Mail dwalker(iidahopower.com jwilliams(idahopower.com Ted Sorensen PE U.S. Mail, postage prepaid Birch Power Company Hand-Delivered 5203 South 11th East Overnight Mail Idaho Falls, Idaho 83404 Facsimile X Via E-Mail ted@tsorenson.net Bill Brown, Chair U.S. Mail, postage prepaid Board of Commissioners of Adams Hand-Delivered County, ID Overnight Mail P.O. Box 48 Facsimile Council, Idaho 83612 _X_ Via E-Mail bdbrown(2frontiernet.net Donald L. Howell, II U.S. Mail, postage prepaid Kristine A. Sasser Hand-Delivered Deputy Attorneys General Overnight Mail Idaho Public Utilities Commission Facsimile 472 W. Washington St. Via E-Mail don.howelhpuc.idaho.gov _X_ Boise, Idaho 83702 kris.sasser(2puc.idaho.gov Arron F. Jepsen U.S. Mail, postage prepaid Blue Ribbon Energy, LLC Hand-Delivered 10660 South 540 East Overnight Mail Sandy, UT 84070 Facsimile X_ Via E-Mail arronesci@aol.com REPLY OF NORTH SIDE CANAL COMPANY, TWIN FALLS CANAL COMPANY, BIG WOOD CANAL COMPANY, AND AMERICAN FALLS RESERVOIR DISTRICT NO. 2 TO IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION, RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR CLARIFICATION, AND CROSS-PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION -8 Wade Thomas, General Counsel U.S. Mail, postage prepaid Dynamis Energy, LLC Hand-Delivered 776 W. Riverside Dr., Ste. 15 Overnight Mail Eagle, Idaho 83616 Facsimile X Via E-Mail wthomas(dvnamisenergy.com Glenn Ikemoto U.S. Mail, postage prepaid Margaret Rueger Hand-Delivered Idaho Windfaims, LLC Overnight Mail 672 Blair Ave. Facsimile Piedmont, CA 94611 Via E-Mail glenth(envisionwind.com _X margaret(äenvisionwind.com Ted Diehl, General Manager U.S. Mail, postage prepaid North Side Canal Company Hand-Delivered 921 N. Lincoln St. Overnight Mail Jerome, Idaho 83338 Facsimile Via E-Mail nscanahcableone.net Megan Walseth Decker U.S. Mail, postage prepaid Senior Staff Counsel Hand-Delivered Renewable Northwest Project Overnight Mail 917 SW Oak St., Ste. 303 Facsimile Portland, OR 97205 _X_ Via E-Mail megan(mp.org Peter J. Richardson U.S. Mail, postage prepaid Gregory M. Adams Hand-Delivered Richardson & O'Leary, PLLC Overnight Mail P.O. Box 7218 Facsimile Boise, Idaho 83702 X Via E-Mail ieterrichardsonandoleary.com greg(richardsonandolearv.com Maw Lewallen U.S. Mail, postage prepaid Clearwater Paper Corporation Hand-Delivered 601 W. Riverside Ave., Ste. 1100 Overnight Mail Spokane, WA 99201 Facsimile X Via E-Mail marv.lewallen(clearwaterpaper.com Benjamin J. Otto U.S. Mail, postage prepaid Idaho Conservation League Hand-Delivered P.O. Box 844 Overnight Mail Boise, Idaho 83701 Facsimile _X Via E-Mail botto(idahoconsewation.org REPLY OF NORTH SIDE CANAL COMPANY, TWIN FALLS CANAL COMPANY, BIG WOOD CANAL COMPANY, AND AMERICAN FALLS RESERVOIR DISTRICT NO. 2 TO IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION, RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR CLARIFICATION, AND CROSS-PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION -9 Don Schoenbeck U.S. Mail, postage prepaid RCS Hand-Delivered 900 Washington St., Ste. 78 Overnight Mail Vancouver, WA 98660 Facsimile X_ Via E-Mail dws@r -c-s-inc.com Liz Woodruff U.S. Mail, postage prepaid Ken Miller Hand-Delivered Snake River Alliance Overnight Mail P.O. Box 1731 Facsimile Boise, Idaho 83701 X Via E-Mail 1wooruff(snakeriveral1iance.org kmiller@snakeriveralliance.org Deborah E. Nelson Kelsey J. Nunez Givens Pursley LLP P.O. Box 2720 Boise, Idaho 83701-2720 Dr. Don Reading 6070 Hill Rd. Boise, Idaho 83703 Tauna Christensen Energy Integrity Project 769N. 1100E. Shelley, Idaho 83274 Lynn Harmon AFRD #2 409 N. Apple St. Shoshone, Idaho 83352 Michael J. Uda Uda Law Firm, P.C. 7 W. 6th Avenue, Suite 4E Helena, MT 59601 Attorneys for Mountain Air Projects, LLC U.S. Mail, postage prepaid Hand-Delivered Overnight Mail Facsimile _X_ Via E-Mail den@givenspursley.com kjn@givenspursley.com U.S. Mail, postage prepaid Hand-Delivered Overnight Mail Facsimile _X Via E-Mail dreadingmindspring.com U.S. Mail, postage prepaid Hand-Delivered Overnight Mail Facsimile _X_ Via E-Mail tauna(energvintegritvDroject.org U.S. Mail, postage prepaid Hand-Delivered Overnight Mail Facsimile _X_ Via E-Mail lynnharmon@cableone.net U.S. Mail, postage prepaid Hand-Delivered Overnight Mail Facsimile X Via E-Mail muda(mthelena.com REPLY OF NORTH SIDE CANAL COMPANY, TWIN FALLS CANAL COMPANY, BIG WOOD CANAL COMPANY, AND AMERICAN FALLS RESERVOIR DISTRICT NO. 2 TO IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION, RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR CLARIFICATION, AND CROSS-PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION -10 J. Kahle Becker, Idaho The Alaska Center 1020 W. Main St. Suite 400 Boise, ID 83702 Attorneys for Mountain Air Projects, LLC U.S. Mail, postage prepaid Hand-Delivered Overnight Mail Facsimile _X_ Via E-Mail kahle(kahlebeckerlaw.com C. Thomas Arkoosh REPLY OF NORTH SIDE CANAL COMPANY, TWIN FALLS CANAL COMPANY, BIG WOOD CANAL COMPANY, AND AMERICAN FALLS RESERVOIR DISTRICT NO. 2 TO IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION, RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR CLARIFICATION, AND CROSS-PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION -11