HomeMy WebLinkAbout20130123Reply.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