20130131Answer.pdf

- tilill 'i r9
•IIIll F
RJj1PC'- MA PLLC
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
Peter Richardson
Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
P.O. Box 7218 Boise, ID 83707 - 515 N. 27th St. Boise, ID 83702
2lli.JN3I Pci 3:59
_I7ILfT IjOk.
31 January 2013
Ms. Jean Jewell
Commission Secretary
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
P 0 Box 83720
Boise ID 83720-0074
RE: Case No. IPC-E-10-03
Dear Ms. Jewell:
Enclosed please find an original and seven (7) copies of the ANSWER OF
THE NORTHWEST AND INTERMOUNTAIN POWER PRODUCERS COALITION
in the above case.
An extra copy is also enclosed to be stamped & returned to our office.
Sincerely,
Nina Curtis
Administrative Assistant
end.
Peter J. Richardson
ISB No. 3195
Richardson & O'Leary
515 N. 27th Street
P.O. Box 7218
Boise, Idaho 83702
Telephone: [phone] Tel
Fax: [phone] Fax
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Northwest and Intermountain
Power Producers Coalition
RECE
241JAH3I PM 3:59
IDAd
U ILi CiMr&
BEFORE THE
IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF THE DEVELOPMENT
OF REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP)
GUIDELINES FOR THE PROCUREMENT OF
SUPPLY-SIDE RESOURCES BY IDAHO
POWER COMPANY
CASE NO. IPC-E-10-03
NORTHWEST AND
INTERMOUNTAIN POWER
PRODUCERS COALITION'S
ANSWER TO STAFF'S MOTION TO
CLOSE CASE
COMES NOW, the Northwest and Intermountain Power Producers Coalition ("NICCP")
and pursuant to the Idaho Public Utilities Commission's ("Commission") Rules of Procedure,
Rule 57(3) IDAPA 31.01.01.57(3) and hereby provides its Answer to Staff's Motion to Close
Case.
NIPPC, along with the J. R. Simplot Company and the Idaho Irrigation Pumpers
Association, initiated this docket on November 26, 2008 in a Petition asking the Commission to
open a generic investigation into the desirability of establishing competitive bidding guidelines
for the procurement of supply-side resources by Idaho Power, PacifiCorp and Avista. Your
Petitioners expressed a concern that the current process for selection of new supply side
resources was not transparent and possibly biased toward the utility's self build option. The
Commission opened Docket No. GNR-E-08-03 in response to the joint Petition.
On December 22, 2009, NIPPC filed a motion with the Commission requesting the
generic docket be limited in scope to just Idaho Power (eliminating Avista and PacifiCorp) due
to the fact that PacifiCorp and Avista's majority service territory regulators already have
competitive procurement rules in place. The Commission granted that motion on February 9,
2010 by opening the current docket (IPC-E-10-03) in Order No. 30999.
Nevertheless, this docket was stayed pending completion of Idaho Power's Langley
Gulch Certificate case, in Docket No. IPC-E-09-03. In Commission Order No. 30892 granting
the Certificate for Langley Gulch, the Commission made the following findings:
The Company should, however, be concerned about perception that the third-party
consultant was directed by the Company and there was a bias in the selection process.
The actual and perceived flaws in the RFP process, we find, while not fatal to the
Company's resource selection, clearly demonstrate a need for a separate proceeding to
consider RFP competitive bidding rules and guidelines. We recognize that the Northwest
& Intermountain Power Producers Coalition has filed a petition requesting such an
investigation (Case No. GNR-E-08-13). The Commission will explore utility RFPs for
supply-side resources in that case or another opened for that purpose.
Order No. 30892, pp 30-31.
Since the date of Order No. 30999, Commission consideration of competitive
procurement rules has languished without diminishing the importance of getting the RFP
process right. In the most recent development, Commission Staff's communications with Idaho
Power has elicited a result that NIPPC supports - assuming NIPPC's understanding of the
private correspondence between Idaho Power and the PUC Staff is accurate.
In its January 2, 2013, letter to the PUC Staff, Idaho Power states:
NIPPC Answer - IPC-E-1O-03 2
Idaho Power conforms to the Competitive Bidding Guidelines in the state of Oregon.
The Company continues its involvement in Phase II of Oregon Public Utility
Commission Case No. UM 1182, a competitive bidding investigation intended to provide
further refinement to the comparison of relevant risks associated with resource
acquisitions.
NIPPC is actively involved alongside Idaho Power in the Oregon Commission UM 1182 Docket.
It should be noted that Idaho Power's reference to "planned compliance" with Oregon's RFP
rules is not discretionary with the utility. That is, Oregon Rules are prescriptively and not
voluntarily complied with. Notwithstanding the Oregon rules, Idaho Power did not comply with
that State's competitive bidding requirements when it issued its RFP for what is now the Langley
Gulch plant. In OPUC Docket No. UE-248, the Oregon Commission admonished Idaho Power:
This Commission was not given the opportunity to review the request for proposal (RFP)
process used to solicit bids for its [Langley Gulch] construction or the selection process
used to select the winning bid. ... To address the concerns about the utility's chosen
process for acquiring Langley, Idaho Power has committed itself to submit all future
resource acquisitions subject to our competitive bidding guidelines to the Commission for
a full and complete review up to and including the issuance of an order approving the
RFP or granting a waiver or other expectations expressly set forth in the guidelines then
in effect.
Order No. 12-358 pp. 3 —4.
In response to Idaho Power's January 2, 2013, letter the Idaho Commission Staff filed its
motion to close this docket stating:
Idaho Power confirms that it is bound by competitive bidding guidelines in the State of
Oregon for its RFP process, and that the Company will comply with those competitive
bidding guidelines in Idaho.
Staff Motion p. 2.
NIPPC Answer - IPC-E-1O-03
After reviewing Idaho Power's and the PUC Staff NIPPC is pleased to endorse the
commitment by Idaho Power and the PUC Staff to follow the Oregon guidelines' (via
Commission Order) in Idaho.
WHEREFORE, the Northwest and Intermountain Power Producers Coalition respectfully
request the Commission issue its order closing Docket No. IPC-E-10-03 by requiring Idaho
Power to fulfill its commitment to utilize the Oregon RFP guidelines that are in effect as of the
time of its next RFP in Idaho.
DATED this 31St day of January 2013.
Richardson & O'Leary, LLP
By
Peter J. Richardson
Northwest and Intermountain
Power Producers Coalition
1 See Oregon PUC Order No. 06-446 in Docket No. UM 1182
NIPPC Answer— ]PC-E- 10-03 4
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on the 31st day of January 2013, a true and correct copy of the
within and foregoing ANSWER OF THE NORTHWEST AND INTERMOUNTAIN POWER
PRODUCERS COALITION was served by U.S. Postal Service and electronic delivery to:
Lisa Nordstrom Michael Andrea
Regulatory Dockets Avista Utilities
Idaho Power Company P0 Box 3727
1221 West Idaho Street Spokane, WA 99220-3727
Boise, Idaho 83707-0070 [e-mail]
lnordstrom(2idahopower.com
[e-mail] Daniel Solander
PacifiCorp DBA Rocky Mountain Power
Jean Jewell 201 S. Main Stree, Ste 2300
Commission Secretary Salt Lake City, UT 84111
Idaho Public Utilities Commission [e-mail]
472 West Washington
Boise, Idaho 83702 Dean Miller
Jean. jewellpuc.idaho.gov McDevitt & Miller, LLP
P0 Box 2564
Glen Ikemoto Boise, Idaho 83701
Idaho Wind Farms, LLC [e-mail]
672 Blair Avenue
Piedmont, CA 94611
g1eni(envisionwind.com
JL CMA3-
Nina Curtis
Administrative Assistant
NIPPC Answer - IPC-E-1O-03