28882.doc

BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION

in the matter of the application of idaho power company for authority to implement a residential and small farm energy rate adjustment credit. )
)
)
)
)
)
CASE NO. ipc-e-01-30

ORDER NO. 28882
On August 31, 2001, Idaho Power Company (Idaho Power; Company) filed an Application with the Idaho Public Utilities Commission (Commission) requesting approval of a new tariff Schedule 98 and Schedule EC (Prairie Service Territory), to implement a Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) Residential and Small Farm Energy Credit (BPA Credit). The Company also requested approval of proposed accounting entries to track the BPA calculations and related modifications to the Power Cost Adjustment (PCA) calculation.
On October 1, 2001, the Commission issued interlocutory Order No. 28868 in Case No. IPC-E-01-30 approving the underlying BPA credit and tariff schedules and establishing a deadline of Friday, October 12, 2001, for Idaho Power to submit Reply Comments regarding Staff’s accounting and PCA recommendations.
Commission Staff was the only party to submit comments in the underlying case. Staff, in its filing, recommended that the Company’s Application in Case No. IPC-E-01-30 be approved with the following modifications:
The cost of delivered BPA power and the quantified benefit of that power disbursed by Idaho Power to qualifying customers should be allocated to all jurisdictions within the PCA like any other power supply expense.

The cost of delivered BPA power should be shared 90/10 by customers and Idaho Power like any other non-QF power supply expense.

Benefits derived and paid by Idaho Power to qualifying customers for BPA power delivered should be excluded from the 90/10 sharing provision of the PCA.

The Company should report monthly market prices, monthly energy use subject to the credit and monthly credits paid in conjunction with current reports provided for the PCA.

Staff contends that its recommendation does not change the calculation of benefits derived nor the benefits returned to qualifying customers as a result of power purchases from BPA. It simply applies existing PCA methodology to recover expenses associated with power actually delivered. Moreover, Staff contends that its recommendation assures that the FERC jurisdiction shares in the cost of a BPA power purchase program that reduces system power supply costs in other areas such as fuel, other power purchase expenses or increased power sales. Non-qualifying customers in Idaho and Oregon share the BPA purchased power expense and, Staff contends, so should the FERC jurisdiction as would be required for any other non-QF power purchase expense.
Company Reply
On October 12, 2001, Idaho Power Company filed a written response to Staff’s recommendations stating “the Company, after reviewing the Staff’s comments, has no objection to the Staff’s modifications to the accounting and PCA treatment.”
Company Letter Filing
On October 29, 2001, Idaho Power made a letter filing in Case No. IPC-E-01-30 apprising the Commission that the Company had elected to convert to monetary benefits under its Settlement Agreement with BPA. Reference BPA Contract No. 00PB-12158, Section 4(c). Computation of the monetary benefit to Idaho Power’s residential and small farm customers will be based on the Forward Flat Block Price Forecast established in the last BPA rate case at $38/MWh for the five-year period ending September 30, 2006. The benefits that were originally computed based on the average Mid-C price less the monthly residential load firm power (RL) rate, the Company states, will now be computed on the Forward Flat-Block Price Forecast of $38/MWh less RL and the monetary benefits will remain as filed. Idaho Power requested a November 1, 2001 effective date from BPA.
COMMISSION FINDINGS
The Idaho Public Utilities Commission has reviewed and considered the filings of record in Case No. IPC-E-01-30 including the comments and recommendations of the Commission Staff, the Company’s October 12, 2001 Reply Comments and the Company’s October 29, 2001 letter filing. The Commission has also reviewed its interlocutory Order No. 28868. We find it reasonable to reaffirm our interlocutory Order. We find that the Company has acquiesced to Staff’s proposed accounting and PCA recommendations. The Commission finds Staff’s four recommendations regarding accounting and PCA treatment to be fair, just and reasonable and further finds it reasonable to require the Company to adopt and implement them.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The Idaho Public Utilities Commission has jurisdiction over Idaho Power Company, an electric utility, and the issues presented in Case No. IPC-E-01-30 pursuant to the authority granted in Idaho Code, Title 61 and the Commission’s Rules of Procedure, IDAPA 31.01.01.000 et seq.
O R D E R
In consideration of the foregoing and by way of further Order in Case No. IPCE0130, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the cost of delivered BPA power and the quantified benefit of that power disbursed by Idaho Power Company to qualifying tariff Schedule 98 and Schedule EC customers should be allocated to all jurisdictions within the PCA like any other power supply expense.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the cost of delivered BPA power should be shared 90/10 by customers and Idaho Power Company like any other non-QF power supply expense.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that benefits derived and paid by Idaho Power Company to qualifying tariff Schedule 98 and Schedule EC customers for BPA power delivered should be excluded from the 90/10 sharing provision of the PCA.
And IT IS FURTHER ORDERED and the Company is directed to report monthly market prices, monthly energy use subject to the BPA Credit and monthly credits paid in conjunction with current reports provided for the PCA.
THIS IS A FINAL ORDER. Any person interested in this Order (or in issues finally decided by this Order) or in interlocutory Orders previously issued in this Case No. IPC-E-01-30 may petition for reconsideration within twenty-one (21) days of the service date of this Order with regard to any matter decided in this order or in interlocutory Orders previously issued in this Case No. IPC-E-01-30. Within seven (7) days after any person has petitioned for reconsideration, any other person may cross-petition for reconsideration. See Idaho Code § 61626.
DONE by Order of the Idaho Public Utilities Commission at Boise, Idaho this _______ day of November 2001.

PAUL KJELLANDER, PRESIDENT

MARSHA H. SMITH, COMMISSIONER

DENNIS S. HANSEN, COMMISSIONER

ATTEST:

Jean D. Jewell
Commission Secretary

vld/O:IPC-E-01-30_sw3

ORDER NO. 28882 1

Office of the Secretary
Service Date
November 7, 2001