20120126Answer.pdf

REGErVED
*SIDA~POR~
An 10ACORP Company
DONOVAN E. WALKER
Lead Counsel
dwalkertidahopower.com
January 26, 2012
VIA HAND DELIVERY
Jean D. Jewell, Secretary
Idaho Public Utilties Commission
472 West Washington Street
Boise, Idaho 83702
Re: Case No. IPC-E-12-01
GRAND VIEW PV SOLAR THREE, LLC, COMPLAINANT, GRAND VIEW PV
SOLAR FOUR, LLC, COMPLAINANT VS. IDAHO POWER COMPANY,
RESPONDENT
Dear Ms. Jewell:
Enclosed for filing please find an original and seven (7) copies of Idaho Power
Company's Answer to the Complaint of Grand View PV Solar Three, LLC and Grand
View PV Solar FOUR, LLC in the above matter.
Donovan E. Walker
DEW:sh
Enclosures
P.O. Box 70 (83707)
1221 W. Idaho St.
Boise, 10 83702
DONOVAN E. WALKER (ISB No. 5921)
JASON B. WILLIAMS (8718)
Idaho Power Company
1221 West Idaho Street (83702)
P.O. Box 70
Boise, Idaho 83707
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
dwalkerCãidahopower.com
jwillamsCãidahopower.com
RECEIVED
2UL2 JAN 26 PM 3: 06
Attorneys for Idaho Power Company
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
GRAND VIEW PV SOLAR THREE, LLC, )
) CASE NO. IPC-E-12-01Complainant, )
) IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S
GRAND VIEW PV SOLAR FOUR, LLC, ) ANSWER
)Complainant, )
)vs. )
)IDAHO POWER COMPANY, )
)Respondent. )
)
Pursuant to the Summons issued by the Idaho Public Utilties Commission
("Commission") on January 5, 2012, and pursuant to RP 57, Idaho Power Company
("Idaho Powet' or "Company"), by and through its attorneys of record, hereby submits
its Answer to the Complaint of Grand View PV Solar Three, LLC and Grand View PV
Solar Four, LLC ("Grand View").
IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S ANSWER - 1
I. ANSWER
Idaho Power hereby answers Grand View's Complaint as follows. Idaho Power
denies any allegation not specifically admitted and reserves the right to supplement this
answer if Grand View amends its Complaint.
1. The factual allegations in the first sentence of paragraph 1 are admitted.
The remaining legal conclusions require no response. That said, Idaho Power
acknowledges that it is a public utilty subject to the jurisdiction of this Commission, the
Public Utility Commission of Oregon, and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
("FERC").
2. Idaho Power has insuffcient information or knowledge regarding the truth
of the allegations in paragraph 2 of the Complaint, which relate to the identity and
corporate structure of Grand View.
3. The allegations in paragraph 3 are legal conclusions and require no
response.
4. The allegations in paragraph 4 are legal conclusions and require no
response.
5. Idaho Power has insufficient information or knowledge regarding the truth
of the allegations in paragraph 5 of the Complaint.
6. The Commission's Order No. 32068 in Docket No. IPC-E-1 0-19 speaks for
itself and requires no response.
7. Idaho Power has insufficient information or knowledge regarding the truth
of the allegations in paragraph 7 of the Complaint.
IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S ANSWER - 2
8. In response to the allegations in paragraph 8 of the Complaint Idaho
Power admits that Grand View Two has a complaint pending before the Commission.
9. In response to the allegations in paragraph 8 of the Complaint Idaho
Power admits that Grand View Two has a completed facility study for the
interconnection of its proposed project to Idaho Powets system.
10. Idaho Power has insufficient information or knowledge regarding the truth
of the allegations in paragraph 10 of the Complaint.
11. Idaho Power has insufficient information or knowledge regarding the truth
of the allegations in paragraph 11 of the Complaint.
12. Idaho Power has insufficient information or knowledge regarding the truth
of the allegations in paragraph 12 of the Complaint.
13. Idaho Power has insufficient knowledge or information regarding the truth
of the allegations in paragraph 13. The Company does not know what Grand View's
reference to "Idaho Power's transmission business line" means.
14. Idaho Power denies the allegations in paragraph 14.
15. Idaho Power has insufficient knowledge or information regarding the truth
of the allegations in paragraph 15.
16. Idaho Power denies the allegation in paragraph 16. Idaho Power has
record of a February 15, 2011, request from the Grand View Two project for pricing, but
not for a contract for Grand View Three and Four.
17. Idaho Power denies the allegation in paragraph 17. Idaho Power has
record that on February 15, 2011, Grand View Two provided estimated generation
IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S ANSWER - 3
profiles for its proposed projects that contained errors including solar generation during
hours of darkness.
18. In response to the allegation in paragraph 18 Idaho Power admits that
Grand View Two, Three, and Four made requests for draft agreements from Idaho
Power.
19. In response to the allegation in paragraph 19 Idaho Power admits that
Grand View Three and Four made a request for a draft agreement from Idaho Power on
July 2, 2011.
20. In response to the allegations in paragraph 20 Idaho Power admits that it
was engaged in negotiations with Grand View on several proposed projects during the
month of July, 2011.
21. Idaho Power denies the allegations in paragraph 21. The July 10, 2011,
e-mail was in regard to Grand View Two, and states, "there is currently no agreement
on the terms of the contract."
22. In response to paragraph 22, Idaho Power admits that Grand View
rejected a draft PURPA power sales agreement provided to it by Idaho Power.
23. In response to paragraph 23 Idaho Power admits that the e-mail referred
to is a communication between counsel for Grand View and counsel for Idaho Power
that when viewed in the full context of the communications shows that such
communications were in response to a specific offer of settlement by counsel for Grand
View by which the issue of RECs could be submitted to the Commission for its
consideration. Idaho Power denies that the communication evidences agreement to all
terms and conditions of a contract except for RECs.
IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S ANSWER - 4
24. In response to the allegation in paragraph 24 Idaho Power admits that
Grand View Solar Two filed a complaint with the Commission on August 2, 2011,
seeking an order "Requiring Idaho Power to resume inserting language in standard
PURPA PPAs to the effect that Idaho Power makes no claim to REC ownership."
25. In response to the allegations in paragraph 25 Idaho Power admits that
Grand View Three and Four requested draft agreements on September 1, 2011.
26. In response to the allegations in paragraph 26 Idaho Power admits that it
responded to Grand View on September 6, 2011, which response speaks for itself.
27. Idaho Power denies the allegations in the first sentence of paragraph 27,
and admits the allegation in the second sentence.
28. In response to the allegations in paragraph 28 Idaho Power admits that it
requested correct generation data from Grand View as the previously provided, required
data showed solar generation during hours of darkness.
29. In response to the allegations in paragraph 29 Idaho Power admits that
Grand View provided corrected generation data.
30. In response to the allegation in paragraph 30 Idaho Power admits that a
contract with Interconnect Solar was filed with the Commission on October 11, 2011.
Idaho Power has insufficient information or knowledge regarding what Grand View
thought about the rates contained in Interconnect Solar's contract.
31. Idaho Power admits the allegation in paragraph 31.
32. Idaho Power denies the allegation in paragraph 32.
33. Idaho Power admits the allegation in paragraph 33.
34. Idaho Power denies the allegation in paragraph 34.
IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S ANSWER - 5
35. In response to the allegations in paragraph 35 Idaho Power admits it
received e-mail communication from counsel for Grand View on December 1, 2011.
36. In response to the allegations in paragraph 36 Idaho Power admits that it
responded to counsel from Grand View on December 1, 2011.
37. In response to the allegations in paragraph 37 Idaho Power admits it
received e-mail communication from counsel for Grand View on December 1, 2011.
38. In response to the allegations in paragraph 38 Idaho Power admits that it
sent draft PURPA power purchase agreements to Grand View on December 2, 2011,
for the purposes of discussion and negotiation pursuant to the Commission's negotiated
avoided cost rate process applicable to Grand View Solar's proposed projects.
39. Idaho Power denies the allegations in paragraph 39.
40. Idaho Power denies the allegations in paragraph 40.
41 . Idaho Power admits the allegations in paragraph 41 .
42. Idaho Power denies the allegations in paragraph 42.
43. Idaho Power denies the allegations in paragraph 43.
44. Idaho Power has insuffcient knowledge or information regarding the truth
of the allegations in paragraph 44.
45. Idaho Power denies the allegations in paragraph 45.
46. Idaho Power has insufficient knowledge or information regarding the truth
of the allegations in paragraph 46.
47. Idaho Power denies the allegations in paragraph 47.
48. Idaho Power denies the allegations in paragraph 48.
49. Idaho Power denies the allegations in paragraph 49.
IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S ANSWER - 6
50. In response to the allegations of paragraph 50 Idaho Power admits that it
provided Grand View with a draft PURPA power sales agreement for the purposes of
discussion and negotiation pursuant to the Commission's negotiated avoided cost rate
process applicable to Grand View Solar's proposed projects that contained rates
different from, and lower than, those contained in the contract with Interconnect Solar
filed with the Commission.
51. In response to the allegations of paragraph 51 Idaho Power admits that
the rates, terms, and conditions contained in the draft PURPA power sales agreements
provided to Grand View for the purposes of discussion and negotiation pursuant to the
Commission's negotiated avoided cost rate process applicable to Grand View Solats
proposed projects are the appropriate rates, terms, and conditions to act as the basis
for discussions and negotiations between Idaho Power and Grand View Solar.
52. In response to paragraph 52 Idaho Power refers to and incorporates
herein paragraphs 1 through 51 above.
53. Idaho Power has insufficient knowledge or information regarding the truth
of the allegations in paragraph 53.
54. The allegations in paragraph 54 are legal conclusions and require no
response.
55. The allegations in paragraph 55 are legal conclusions and require no
response.
56. Idaho Power denies the allegations in paragraph 56.
IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S ANSWER - 7
WHEREFORE, Idaho Power respectfully requests that the Commission issue its
Order denying the relief sought by Grand View in its Prayer for Relief and dismissing the
Complaint.
Respectfully submitted thi~y of January 2012.
o NOVAN E. WALKER
Attorney for Idaho Power Company
IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S ANSWER - 8
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on thii:~ay of January 2012 I served a true and
correct copy of IDAHO POWER CO~Y; ANSWER upon the following named
parties by the method indicated below, and addressed to the following:
Commission Staff
Kristine Sasser
Deputy Attorney General
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
472 West Washington
P.O. Box 83720
Boise, Idaho 83720-0074
-2 Hand Delivered
U.S. Mail
_ Overnight Mail
FAX
-2 Email Kris.SasserCãpuc.idaho.gov
Grand View PV Solar Two, LLC
Peter J. Richardson
Gregory M. Adams
RICHARDSON & O'LEARY, PLLC
515 North 2th Street (83702)
P.O. Box 7218
Boise, Idaho 83707
Hand Delivered
-2 U.S. Mail
_ Overnight Mail
FAX
-2 Email peterCãrichardsonandoleary.com
gregCãrichardsonandoleary.com
IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S ANSWER - 9