20020520Idaho Power Petition for Clarification of Order No. 29026.pdf

LARRY D.RIPLEY ISB #965
Idaho Power Company 2002 gy ggP.O.Box 70
Boise,Idaho 83707 ....Telephone:[phone] UTILITIES COLSISSIOHFAXTelephone:[phone]
Attorney for Idaho Power Company
Street Address for Express Mail:
1221 West Idaho Street
Boise,Idaho 83702
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION )OF IDAHO POWER COMPANY FOR AN )CASE NO.IPC-E-02-02
ENERGY COST FINANCING ORDER AND )IPC-E-02-03AUTHORITYTOINSTITUTEANENERGY)COSTBONDCHARGE.)
)IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S
)PETITION FOR CLARIFICATIONINTHEMATTEROFTHEAPPLICATION)OF ORDER NO.29026
OF IDAHO POWER COMPANY FOR )AUTHORITY TO IMPLEMENT A POWER )COSTADJUSTMENT(PCA)RATEFOR )ELECTRIC SERVICE FROM MAY 16,2002 )THROUGH MAY 15,2003.)
Idaho Power Company ("ldaho Power"or "the Company")herewith
petitionsfor clarification of Order No.29026 pursuant to RP 325 for the following
reasons:
Under service date of May 13,2002,the Commission in this proceeding
issued Order No.29026.In that Order at p.8 the Commission discussed an Irrigation
Lost Revenue Adjustmentand made findings as follows:
IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S PETITION FOR CLARIFICATIONOF ORDER NO.29026,Page 1
1.Irriqation Lost Revenue Adjustment.Last year,theCommissionapprovedaprogramtopayirrigatorstoreducetheirconsumptionofenergyandauthorizedIdahoPowertorecoverits direct
costs associated with the program in this year's PCA.Order No.28992.Staff verified $73,941,839.42in direct program costs and that they wereproperlyincludedinthePCAaccount.Tr.at 424.In addition to thesedirectcosts,Idaho Power calculated that it "lost"$15,146,639.32 in
revenue when irrigators participated in the Irrigation Load ReductionProgram.'Staff recommended disallowance of the "lost"revenues perOrderNo.28992,in which the Commission denied recovery of theCompany's reduced revenues.Id.
Commission Findings.This issue has been thoroughly
addressed during the proceedings in Case No.IPC-E-01-34.In that case
we stated,"in the context of the market situation that existed at the timethisProgramwasapproved,it was the prudent if not required action fortheCompanytotakeandthatfurtherincentives,such as the recovery of
lost revenues,to developand utilize a program of this type were notneeded."Order No.28992 at 7-8.Consistent with our final Order in Case
No.IPC-E-01-34,we disallow recovery of the $15,146,639.32included byIdahoPower.2
"Lost"revenue refers to revenue that the utility would have earned if ithadsoldpowertotheparticipatingirrigatorsinsteadofpayingtheirrigatorstoreducetheirelectricconsumption.
On May 2,2002,Idaho Powerfiled a Petition for Reconsideration inCaseNo.IPC-E-01-34.
The Commission in its discussion and findings in Order No.29026,Case
No.IPC-E-02-02/03 referred to the Petition for Reconsideration that the Company filed
and is currently pending in Case No.IPC-E-01-34.It is the Company'sunderstanding
that the Commission in Order No.29026 at p.8 considers Order No.28992 issued in
Case No.IPC-E-01-34 as being the controlling decision that resulted in the
disallowance of irrigation load reduction lost revenues in IPC-E-02-02/03.The
Company believes that the issue of the disallowance of lost revenue is properly before
the Commission in Case No.IPC-E-01-34.The Company,however,does not desire to
IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S PETITION FOR CLARIFICATIONOF ORDER NO.29026,Page 2
assume at its peril that this is the case and,accordingly,asks the Commission to clarify
that in Order No.29026 the Commission was simply referring to Order No.28992
issued in Case No.IPC-E-01-34 and that Order No.28992 is the controlling Order as to
the disallowance of irrigation load reduction lost revenues.
The Company requests that pursuant to RP 325 the Commission clarify its
Order No.29026 that the Commission was simply referring to Order No.28992 issued
in Case No.IPC-E-01-34 and that the Commission considers Order No.28992 as the
controllingOrder in disallowingirrigation load reduction lost revenues.The Company
requests that the Commission issue its order as to this issue before the time for filing a
petition for reconsideration has expired,so that if Idaho Power is required to file a
petition for reconsideration,it still has time to do so.
Respectfully submitted this 20th day of May,2002.
ARRY RlPËEY '
Attorneyfor Idaho Power Company
IDAHO POWER COMPANY'SPETITION FOR CLARIFICATIONOF ORDER NO.29026,Page 3
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 20th day of May,2002,I served a true
and correct copy of the above and foregoing IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S PETITION
FOR CLARIFICATION OF ORDER NO.29026 upon the followingnamed parties by the
method indicated below,and addressed to the following:
Lisa D.Nordstrom x Hand Delivered
Deputy Attorney General U.S.Mail
Idaho Public Utilities Commission _Overnight Mail
472 W.WashingtonStreet _FAX
P.O.Box 83720
Boise,Idaho 83720-0074
John Hammond _x _Hand Delivered
Deputy Attorney General _U.S.Mail
Idaho Public Utilities Commission Overnight Mail
472 W.WashingtonStreet FAX
P.O.Box 83720
Boise,Idaho 83720-0074
R.Scott Pasley __Hand Delivered
Assistant General Counsel x U.S.Mail
J.R.SimplotCompany OvernightMail
P.O.Box 27 FAX
Boise,Idaho 83707
David Hawk Hand Delivered
Director,Energy Natural Resources U.S.Mail
J.R.SimplotCompany OvernightMail
P.O.Box 27 FAX
Boise,Idaho 83707
Peter J.Richardson Hand Delivered
Richardson &O'Leary,PLLC x U.S.Mail
99 East State Street,Suite 200 _OvernightMail
P.O.Box 1849 _FAX
Eagle,Idaho 83616
William M.Eddie _Hand Delivered
Land and Water Fund of the Rockies _x_U.S.Mail
P.O.Box 1612 _OvernightMail
Boise,Idaho 83701 _FAX
RR D.RIPLEY *
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE