20170130_5189.pdf

DECISION MEMORANDUM 1
DECISION MEMORANDUM
TO: COMMISSIONER KJELLANDER
COMMISSIONER RAPER
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON
COMMISSION SECRETARY
COMMISSION STAFF
LEGAL
FROM: DAPHNE HUANG
DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL
DATE: JANUARY 25, 2017
SUBJECT: ICL AND SIERRA CLUB’S JOINT PETITION FOR LATE
INTERVENTION IN IDAHO POWER’S APPLICATION TO INCREASE
RATES DUE TO REVISED DEPRECIATION RATES, CASE NO. IPC-E-
16-23
On October 21, 2016, Idaho Power Company filed an Application asking the
Commission to adopt revised depreciation rates for its electric plant-in-service and
correspondingly adjust Idaho jurisdictional base rates. Application (Case No. IPC-E-16-23) at 1.
The proposed adjustment in this Application is an overall rate increase of 0.59 percent. Errata to
Application (Case No. IPC-E-16-23). The Company concurrently filed an Application for
authority to (1) accelerate the depreciation schedule for the North Valmy power plant; (2)
establish a balancing account to track the incremental costs and benefits associated therewith;
and (3) adjust customer rates to recover the associated incremental annual levelized revenue
requirement. Application (Case No. IPC-E-16-24) at 1. The result of this Application is an
overall rate increase of 2.51 percent. Errata to Application (Case No. IPC-E-16-24). With the
filings, the Company intends to facilitate a single rate change for customers.
The Commission issued Orders providing notice of the Applications, setting a
deadline for interventions, and directing the parties to confer about a schedule for the cases.
Order Nos. 33650, 33652. The Commission granted timely-filed motions to intervene in both
cases from the Idaho Irrigation Pumpers Association, Inc., Micron Technology, Inc., and the
U.S. Department of Energy and the Federal Executive Agencies. Order Nos. 33659, 33660,
33670, 33671, 33673 and 33674. The Commission also granted intervention to Idaho
DECISION MEMORANDUM 2
Conservation League and Sierra Club in the North Valmy case, and to the Industrial Customers
of Idaho Power (ICIP) in the Revised Depreciation case. Order Nos. 33672 and 33676.
The parties conferred informally and agreed to a schedule to process the matter under
Modified Procedure. The Commission issued a Notice adopting the proposed agreed schedule
on January 17, 2017. Order No. 33690. As part of the schedule, the parties agreed to meet on
February 2 to discuss negotiated solutions in both cases. See id. at 2. Because the parties in the
Revised Depreciation case are not identical to the parties in the Valmy case, the parties
acknowledged that settlement discussions will need to be conducted separately, and parties must
be mindful of confidentiality requirements in Rule 272.
On January 18, 2017, ICL and Sierra Club filed a joint petition for late intervention in
the Revised Depreciation case, which it supplemented with an addendum on January 24. (ICL
and Sierra Club stated that the addendum was filed “to more clearly state for the record the direct
and substantial interest of Sierra Club’s members in this docket.”) The Commission received no
objections to the petition for late intervention by the January 25 deadline per Rule 75. ICL and
Sierra Club’s Petition is now before the Commission.
LATE PETITIONS TO INTERVENE
Commission Rules provides that a petitioner seeking intervention must state its
“direct and substantial interest . . . in the proceeding.” IDAPA 31.01.01.072. Petitions to
intervene that are not timely filed “must state a substantial reason for delay.” IDAPA
31.01.01.073. “The Commission may deny or conditionally grant petitions to intervene that are
not timely filed for failure to state good cause for untimely filing, to prevent disruption, prejudice
to existing parties or undue broadening of the issues, or for other reasons.” Id. Also,
“Intervenors who do not file timely petitions are bound by orders and notices earlier entered as a
condition of granting the untimely petition.” Id.
ICL AND SIERRA CLUB’S PETITION FOR INTERVENTION
ICL states that it has a direct and substantial interest in the Revised Depreciation case
because of the impact caused by the revised depreciation rates contemplated in Idaho Power’s
filing on ICL’s members served by Idaho Power, and also based on ICL’s “long-term role
advocating for public values” as Idaho’s largest state-based conservation organization. Petition
at 2. Sierra Club asserts it has a direct and substantial interest in this proceeding because of the
matter’s impact on its members who are customers of Idaho Power. Addendum to Petition.
DECISION MEMORANDUM 3
ICL and Sierra Club (“Petitioners”) state that they considered intervening in both
dockets but are focusing their resources on their “primary interest, the North Valmy docket.”
Petition at 1. The Petitioners believe that the other parties’ negotiations in the Revised
Depreciation docket may impact their interests in the North Valmy case. Id. at 1-2. Further, the
Petitioners believe that their intervention in both matters could simplify settlement discussions in
the cases, as well as “promote judicial efficiency and encourage settlement of the issues.” Id. at
2. For these reasons, the Petitioners assert they have good cause for their late intervention.
Finally, both Petitioners assert that their intervention “will not unduly broaden the issues or delay
the proceeding.” Id. at 3.
COMMISSION DECISION
Does the Commission wish to find that ICL and Sierra Club have stated good cause
for their late petition, have identified direct and substantial interest in this case, and will not
unduly broaden the issues, and thus grant the late petition to intervene?
M:IPC-E-16-23_djh2