20131017Answer to Petition.pdf

r- i ..
4n!t r\iaT I ? -:! t-4- ^-.ij; UL, I ii ii jli/.Jf
iPeter J. Richardson ISB # 3195
Greg Adams ISB # 7454
RICHARDSON ADAMS PLLC
515 N. 27th Street
Boise, Idaho 83702
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
peter@richardsonadams. com
Attomeys for Glanbia Foods, In.
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF ) CASE NO. IPC-E-13-09
GLANBIA FOODS, INC. FOR )
APPROVAL OF A LINE EXTENSION ) GLANBIA FOODS, NC.'s ANSWER
ALLOWANCE PURSUANT TO IDAHO ) TO IDAHO POWER',S PETITION
POWER COMPANY'S RULE H ) FOR CLARIFICATION AND/OR
) RECONSIDERATION
Pursuant to Rule 331(05) of the Rules of Procedure of the Idaho Public Utilities
Commission (o'Commission"), Glanbia Foods, Inc. ("Glanbia") by and through its attomey of
record, Peter Richardson, hereby lodges its Answer to Idaho Power Company's ("Company")
Petition for Clarification and/or Reconsideration ("Petition").
RECONSIDERATION
Idaho Power's Petition is more that a request for mere clarification and ought to be
treated as a true Petition for Reconsideration pursuant to Idaho Code Section 6l-626, which
requires the Commission to issue its order on reconsideration within twenty eight days of ldaho
Idaho Power's filing.
I _GLANBIA ANSWER TO PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION - IPC-E-I3-09
ANSWER
Incremental Versus Total Load
Idaho Power's Petition asserts, with respect to the load an allowance should apply to that:
The Company believes a scalable allowance is appropriately applied based on
incremental load added by the customer at a specific premise. Otherwise, if every
industrial customer who requested an upgrade received an allowance based on existing
load plus new load, the practice could lead to duplicative allowances over time and an
inappropriate building of ratebase. I
Idaho Power's concem is misplaced. Glanbia is paying for an entirely new connection and
substation. It is therefore freeing up capacity at a substation that will no longer be used to serve
it. The allowance should be applied to the load associated with new construction and new
facilities. It should not be based on the load associated with unused, idle facilities that are
retumed to the Company's store for service to other customers. If a residential customer builds a
new house next door to his existing house, that customer would still be entitled to an allowance
despite the fact that it did not have any incremental load. Likewise, if Glanbia builds a new
substation and new transmission line to serve its load those costs are incurred for the purpose of
serving the entirety of Glanbia's load, not just the incremental load.
By limiting the allowance to just the cost of new facilities, Idaho Power's bogey man is
adequately checked. For instance, were Glanbia just adding facilities to the existing substation,
the allowance would be applied to just the load associated with those new facilities. In this case,
if Glanbia were able upgrade the existing substation to add an additional seven megawatts, then
the allowance would be limited to just 7 megawatts. But here, Glanbia is paying for the
construction of entirely new facilities that are designed to serve its entire anticipated load of 19
megawatts and it is no longer using the old substation. Idaho Power's Petition for
Reconsideration on this issue should be denied.
I Petition at 4, emphasis in original.
2 _CLANBIA ANSWER TO PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION - IPC-E-I3-09
OATT Issues
Glanbia fails to see the relationship between the Company's OATT2 and this state-
jurisdictional interconnection issue. Glanbia is not taking nor is it seeking transmission service
under Idaho Power's OATT, therefore the OATT (and how ldaho Power implements and
complies with the OATT) is irrelevant to the issues before this Commission. Glanbia does not
even meet the definitional requirements in the OATT to be a transmission customer, which
provides:
Eligible Customer: (i) Any electric utility (including the Transmission Provider and any
power marketer), Federal power marketing agency, or any person generating electric
energy for sale for resale is an Eligible Customer under the Tariff.'
Glanbia is not a Transmission Provider nor is it a Federal power marketing agency and it is not
generating electric energy for sale for resale. Glanbia does not even generate electricity, let
alone generating electricity for sale for resale. For these reasons the Commission should simply
disregard Idaho Power's discussion regarding application of the OATT to this state-jurisdictional
interconnection.
DATED this 17th day of October,2013.
RICHARDSON ADAMS PLLC
' Idaho Power Company Open Access Transmission Tariff, FERC Docket No. ERl0-2126-000.t Id. at g I .13, emphasis in original.
3 -GLANBIA ANSWER TO PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION - IPC-E-I3-09
son, ISB #3195
Attorneys GLANBIA FOODS, INC.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on the 17s day of October,2}l3,a true and correct copy of
the within and foregoing ANSWER TO IDAHO POWER'S PETITION FOR
RECONSIDERATION was served in the manner shown to:
Ms. Jean Jewell
Commission Secretary
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
472 W. Washington (83702)
PO Box 83720
Boise, lD 83720-0074
Lisa Nordstrom
Donovan Walker
Idaho Power Company
PO Box 70
Boise, Idaho 83707 -0070
lnordstrom@idahooower. com
dwalker@ idahopower. com
X Hand Delivery
_U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
_ Facsimile
Electronic Mail
X Hand Delivery
_U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid
_ Facsimile
X_ Electronic Mail
Nina Curtis, Administrative Assistant
4 _CLANBIA ANSWER TO PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION _ IPC-E-I3-09