20141030Comments.pdf

KRISTINE A. SASSER
DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL
IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
PO BOX 83720
BOISE, IDAHO 83720-007 4
(208) 334-03s7
BAR NO. 6618
Street Address for Express Mail:
472 W , WASHINGTON
BOISE, IDAHO 83702-5918
Attorney for the Commission Staff
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF
IDAHO POWER COMPANY FOR APPROVAL
AND IMPLEMENTATION OF SCHEDULE 73,
COGENERATION AND SMALL POWER
PRODUCTION.
,''i f" r\ r-;"r t.. L i-. i ,., ,.. I i
?0lrr OCI 30 p,\ 2: 56
Jllit.'. 1.. i
Ij ll. I i' i,. i1.,,..j:;l;t_,i
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
CASE NO. IPC.E,-I4-24
COMMENTS OF THE
COMMISSION STAFF
COMES NOW the Staff of the Idaho Public Utilities Commission, by and through its
Attorney of record, Kristine A. Sasser, Deputy Attorney General, and in response to the Notice of
Application and Notice of Modified Procedure issued in Order No. 33136 on September 24,2014,
in Case No. IPC-E-14-24, submits the following comments.
BACKGROUND
In Case No. GNR-E-11-03, several parties expressed an interest in the investor-owned
utilities developing and adopting certain procedures to be used by QF developers and such utilities
to negotiate and enter into power purchase agreements under PURPA. In Order No. 32697, the
Commission directed the parties to participate in workshops "to begin to form a structure for fair
and reasonable contracting procedures and rules." Draft proposed contracting procedures prepared
by the utilities and certain QF developers were discussed at those workshops; however, a
consensus on a complete set of contracting procedures to be used by all utilities was not reached.
STAFF COMMENTS ocToBER 30,2014
During the course of the workshops, each utility expressed slightly different needs and abilities
based on numerous internal factors, and thus each utility desired to manage the details of whatever
tariff it might propose to the Commission for approval. Staff was optimistic that the proposal and
adoption of similar tariffs might reduce the number of complaints filed with the Commission
because the tariff would allow for more certainty in communications between the parties to the
agreement. Staff also acknowledged that each utility's tariff would be slightly different to meet
the utility's specific needs. Therefore, each utility was given the option of developing its own set
of procedures to be used when it is negotiating and entering into contracts with QF developers.
On March 27,2074, Avista Corporation filed proposed tariff revisions with the
Commission in order to incorporate PURPA contracting procedures and timelines into its existing
Cogeneration and Small Power Production Schedule. On May 30,2014, with some modifications,
the Commission approved Avista's proposed tariff (Schedule 62). The Commission also
encouraged "the remaining utilities to consider progress made through the workshops and
contemplate submission of a similar tariff that might eliminate or reduce the uncertainty that is
somewhat inherent in negotiations between utilities and QFs." Order No. 33048 at 5.
Idaho Power responded to the Commission's suggestion on August 29,2014, by filing
an Application requesting that the Commission approve its proposed tariff Schedule 73,
Cogeneration and Small Power Production Schedule - Idaho.
Idaho Power's proposed tariff will apply to all PURPA QFs that intend to connect to its
system within the State of Idaho. Idaho Power's proposed Schedule 73 was drafted to closely
match Avista's approved Schedule 62, and the majority of Schedule 73 is identical to Avista's
Schedule 62, including the identified contracting procedure "steps" and the time period set forth
for response/action in each step. Idaho Power states that several changes were made to reflect
differences between Idaho Power and Avista, but for all intents and purposes, the schedules are
essentially the same.
Idaho Power's proposed tariff sets forth general information to be provided to the
Company by a QF in Section 1.a under "Contracting Procedures." Within 20 days of the receipt
of such information, Idaho Power will provide a QF with an indicative pricing proposal for the
QF. Such pricing is not final or binding on either party and is intended to provide indicative
pricing early in the process to enable the QF developer to make preliminary determinations
regarding its proposed project.
STAFF COMMENTS ocroBER 30,2014
Schedule 73, Section 1.d sets forth that the prices and other terms and conditions in the
agreement are only final and binding upon full execution by the parties and approval by the
Commission - or pursuant to a legally enforceable obligation determination by the Commission.
This includes the Commission's determination requiring the QF to deliver its electrical output
within 365 days of a determination of a legally enforceable obligation. Citing Order No. 33048.
If a QF desires to proceed after receiving indicative pricing, the QF may request a draft
energy sales agreement (ESA). Section 1.e sets forth the information the Company will need for
the preparation of the draft ESA. Fifteen days after receipt of all information, the Company will
provide the QF with a draft ESA. Within 90 days of receipt of the draft ESA, a QF will notify
Idaho Power whether it accepts the terms and conditions and is ready to execute an ESA or that it
has comments and proposed changes to the draft ESA. If a QF seeks to provide comments or
changes, Section I j sets forth guidelines to be used during such negotiations.
When both parties are satisfied with the draft ESA and the QF provides Idaho Power
with evidence that interconnection will occur prior to the requested first energy date, Idaho Power
shall provide the QF with a final, executable version of the ESA within 10 business days. The QF
shall then have l0 business days to execute and return the final ESA to the Company. If the QF
fails to meet the timelines in the proposed tarifl the procedures shall begin anew. Citing Section
1.n.
STAFF ANALYSIS
Idaho Power's proposed Schedule 73 was developed to closely match Avista's
approved Schedule 62. Although the two schedules are essentially the same, Idaho Power made
several changes in drafting its own schedule. Those changes can be categorized into five types:
adding content, deleting content, rewording content, redefining content, and tailoring content to fit
Idaho Power. (The difference between Rewording Content and Redefining Content is that the
former does not change the meaning of the content, whereas the latter gives new definitions and
meanings to the content.) The table below presents a non-exhaustive list of examples for each
type.
STAFF COMMENTS ocToBER 30,2014
Comparing Avista's Approved Schedule 62 and ldaho Power's Proposed Schedule 73
I Staff notes that solar integration charges have not been approved yet by the Commission as of this writing. A
technical hearing on this matter will be held November 13,2014. Order No. 33137 .
Avista's Annroved Schedule 62 Idaho Power's Proposed Schedule 73
Adding
Content
"Customer" as used herein means any
individual, partnership, corporation,
association, governmental agency,
political subdivision, municipality or
other entity (See Definitions)
Customer as used herein means any
individual, partnership, corporation,
association, governmental agency,
political subdivision, municipality, or
other entity that owns an existing or
proposed Qualifying Facility (See
Definitions).
It did not include discussion of
"Desi gnated Network Resource"
The Company's obligation to purchase
Qualiffing Facility electrical output
from the Customer will be conditioned
on the Facility being classified as a
Company Designated Network Resource
(See Contractins Procedures 2c).
Deleting
Content
For options of levelized fueled rates,
non-levelized fueled rates, levelized non-
fueled rates, and non-levelized non-
fueled rates, "[t]he resultant shall be
applied to the Facility output for all
kilowatt-hours up to the Eligibility Cap
in any given month" (See Rates).
Idaho Power deleted the sentence that
"[t]he resultant shall be applied to the
Facility output for all kilowatt-hours up
to the Eligibility Cap in any given
month" for the corresponding rates (See
Rate Options).
Rewording
Content
"Point Of Common Coupling" (or PCC)
means the point where the Customer's
local electric power system connects to
the Company's distribution system, such
as the electric power revenue meter or at
the location of the equipment designated
to interrupt, separate or disconnect the
connection between the Customer and
the Comoanv (See Definitions).
Point of Delivery (POD) is the location
specified in the GIA (or Transmission
Agreement) where the Company's and
the Seller's (or third-party transmission
provider's) electrical facilities are
interconnected and the energy from the
Qualifying Facility is delivered to the
Company electrical system (See
Definitions).
"Power Purchase Agreement""Enersv Sales Asreement (ESA)"
Redefining
Content
"lntegration Charges" means the
integration charge applicable to wind
generation approved by the Idaho Public
Utilities Commission in Order No.
30500, or as superseded (See
Definitions).
Integration Charees means the
Commission-approved integration
charge applicable to any intermittent
generation resource, including but not
limited to, wind and solar rgeneration
(See Definitions).
Fueled rates "shall apply to natural gas
fueled Facilities....", whereas non-fueled
rates "shall apply to Facilities that do not
use natural gas as their primary fuel"
(See Rates).
Fueled rates "shall apply to Facilities
fueled with fossil fuels...", whereas non-
fueled rates "shall apply to Facilities that
do not use fossil fuels as their primary
fuel" (See Rates Options).
STAFF COMMENTS ocroBER 30,2014
Tailoring
Content
"Daily Shape Adjustment" means an
adjustment to rates based on a difference
between on-peak (6am to l0pm) rates of
$5 per MWh...(See Def,rnitions).
Daily Shape Adjustment means an
adjustment to rates based on a difference
between Heavy Load rates and Light
Load rates of $7.28 per MWh as
established in Commission Order No.
3041 5 (See Definitions).
"Seasonal Factors" means a seasonal
weighting of 0.84 for the period March
through June, and 1.08 for the period
July through February (See Definitions).
Seasonal Factors means a seasonal
weighting of 0.735 for the months of
March, April, and May, 1.20 for the
months of July, August, November, and
December and L00 for the months of
January, February, June, September, and
October (See Definitions).
RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff has carefully reviewed Idaho Power's proposed Schedule 73 and believes that it
lays out a fair process with reasonable timelines to guide the negotiation of PURPA contracts.
Staff concludes that the minor differences between Avista's approved Schedule 62 and Idaho
Power's proposed Schedule 73 are either not material or alternatively, appropriate to tailor the
content to Idaho Power. Staff recommends approval of Idaho Power's Schedule 73 as proposed.
Respectfully submittedthis 3P day ofOctober 2014.
Technical Staff: Rick Sterling
Yao Yin
i : umisc :comments/ipce I 4,24ksrpsyy comments
STAFF COMMENTS
Deputy Attorney General
ocToBER 30,2014
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBy cERTIFy rHAT I HAVE THIS 30'h DAy oF ocroBER 2014,
SERVED THE FOREGOING COMMENTS OF THE COMMISSION STAF''F, IN
CASE NO. IPC-E.14-24, BY MAILING A COPY THEREOF, POSTAGE PREPAID, TO
THE FOLLOWING:
DONOVAN E. WALKER
REGULATORY DOCKETS
TDAHO POWER COMPANY
P.O. BOX 70
BOISE, TD 83707
E-MAIL: [e-mail]
dockets@idahopower. com
RANDY C. ALLPHIN
ENERGY CONTRACT ADMINISTRATOR
IDAHO POWER COMPANY
PO BOX 70
BOrSE rD 83707-0070
E-MAIL: [e-mail]
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE