20180725Idaho Power Cross-Petition.pdf

Sffi*RECE'VsD
rCI,B JUL a5 PH &: 29
l/r
lsslof,J
E. Walker
@
An TDACORP Company
DONOVAN E. WALKER
Lead Counsel
dwal [e-mail]
DEW:csb
Enclosures
July 25, 2018
VIA HAND DELIVERY
Diane Hanian, Secretary
!daho Public Utilities Commission
472 West Washington Street
Boise, ldaho 83702
Re: Case No. !PC-E-18-07
Petition for Modification of 90/110 Performance Band and Calculation of
O&M Charges for PURPA QFs - ldaho Power Company's Cross-Petition
and/or Petition to Modify the 90/110 Firmness Requirement for Establishing
Eligibility for Avoided Cost Rates Pursuant to a Legally Enforceable
Obligation
Dear Ms. Hanian:
Enclosed forfiling in the above matter are an original and seven (7) copies of ldaho
Power Company's Cross-Petition and/or Petition to Modify the 90/110 Firmness
Requirement for Establishing Eligibility for Avoided Cost Rates Pursuant to a Legally
Enforceable Obligation.
Very yours,
Attorney for ldaho Power Company
BEFORE THE !DAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF
IDAHYDRO, SHOROCK HYDRO, !NC.,
J.R. SIMPLOT COMPANY, AND
RENEWABLE ENERGY COALITION FOR
MODIFICATION OF THE 9O/1 1O
PERFORMANCE BAND AND
CALCULATION OF OPERATION AND
MAINTENANCE CHARGES FOR PURPA
QUALIFYING FACILITIES
RTCE IVED
?OIB JUL 25 PH h: 29
- rnr rnilir.. ,' I r-J[-'.Li\,' i:l l'rii:li CLtlJh{lSSl0N
CASE NO. !PC-E-18-07
IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S
CROSS-PETITION AND/OR
PETITION TO MODIFY THE 9O/1 1O
FIRMNESS REQUIREMENT FOR
ESTABL!SHI NG EL!G!B! LITY FOR
AVOIDED COST RATES
PURSUANT TO A LEGALLY
EN FORCEABLE OBLIGATION
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ldaho Power Company ("ldaho Power" or "Company"), pursuant to RP 53, 57, and
326, hereby cross petitions and/or petitions, as appropriate, the ldaho Public Utilities
Commission ("Commission") to modify, alter, or amend existing orders or rules and to
clarify rights, obligations, and the implementation of Sections 201 and 210 of the Public
IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S CROSS-PETITION AND/OR PETITION TO MODIFY THE 9O/110
FIRMNESS REQUIREMENT FOR ESTABLISHING ELIGIBILITY FOR AVOIDED COST RATES
PURSUANT TO A LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE OBLIGATION - 1
DONOVAN E. WALKER (lSB No. 5921)
ldaho Power Company
1221West ldaho Street (83702)
P.O. Box 70
Boise, ldaho 83707
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
dwal ker@ id a hopower. com
Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 ("PURPA'), 16 U.S.C. $ 824a-3 ef seg., and various
Commission orders, as set forth herein.
RP 57 addresses answers to complaints and petitions. Surprisingly, unless the
Commission modifies the time within which to answer, RP 57.02 references and
contemplates answers to petitions within 21 days after service of petition in the same
manner as one would answer a complaint, which is contrary to the customary practice in
front of the Commission where a formal answer is seldom, if ever, filed in response to a
petition. Additionally, while RP 57.02.a references both complaints and petitions, the rule
is silent as to a cross-petition, while stating that matters alleged by cross-complaint must
be separately stated and numbered. Thus, ldaho Power hereby files this pleading as a
cross-petition and/or petition. As referenced and further discussed below, the parties to
this proceeding have previously discussed converting this matter into a GNR, generic
proceeding applicable to all Qualifying Facilities ("QF') and all utilities, but have been
unsuccessful in reaching agreement as to the scope of this proceeding as wel! as a
procedural schedule, with those efforts still ongoing. And as further discussed below,
ldaho Power believes that the issues raised by the QF Parties' petition necessarily, and
expressly, implicate the Commission's overall implementation of Federal Regulation, 18
C.F.R S 292.304(d), and the proper implementation of PURPA for the state of Idaho.
ldaho Power asks that the Commission either grant leave to allow ldaho Power to cross
petition, or alternatively, that it consider ldaho Power's pleading as an independent
petition and consider both ldaho Power's petition and the QF Parties' petition in one
consolidated proceeding. ln any event, ldaho Power believes that the proper scope and
determination requested of the Commission by both the QF Parties' petition and ldaho
IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S CROSS.PETITION AND/OR PETITION TO MODIFY THE 9O/110
FIRMNESS REQUIREMENT FOR ESTABLISHING ELIGIBILITY FOR AVOIDED COST RATES
PURSUANT TO A LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE OBLIGATION - 2
Power's cross-petition/petition is applicable to all potential QFs regardless of generation
type and would be appropriately considered in a GNR, generic, case for the general
applicability to all QFs and all utilities of the Commission's implementation of PURPA in
the state of ldaho. This would presumably require a new Notice and lntervention Period
prior to the establishment of a procedural schedule.
Accordingly, ldaho Power petitions the Commission to determine the proper
breadth and scope of its implementation of 18 C.F.R. S 292.304(d) in the state of ldaho,
and the proper firmness determination and requirements in order for a QF to establish a
legally enforceable obligation thereunder along with the associated pricing determined at
the time of entering into such legally enforceable obligation or contract, as more fully set
forth herein, and as stated in the Prayer for Relief.
II. BACKGROUND. INITIAL PETITION. SCOPE AND PROCEDURE
On April 16, 2018, ldaho Hydroelectric Power Producers Trust ("ldahydro"),
Shorock Hydro, lnc. ("Shorock"), J.R. Simplot Company ("Simplot"), and the Renewable
Energy Coalition ("REC") (collectively, "QF Parties" or "QF Petitioners") filed a petition
with the Commission asking that the 901110 requirement for firm pricing contained in
PURPA QF energy sales agreements ("ESA") with utilities be abandoned as it applies to
"small hydropower, cogeneration, biomass, and baseload QFs" and, further, that the
Commission-approved schedule of operation and maintenance ("O&M) charges
contained in ldaho Power's Schedule 72 be revised to "only allow charges to QFs for
actual O&M expenses at the time of occurrence." QF Parties' Petition at 9-10. ln the QF
Petitioners' Prayer for relief they ask the Commission to order, among other things:
IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S CROSS-PETITION AND/OR PETITION TO MODIFY THE 90/110
FIRMNESS REQUIREMENT FOR ESTABLISHING ELIGIBILITY FOR AVOIDED COST RATES
PURSUANT TO A LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE OBLIGATION .3
That small hydropower, cogeneration, biomass, and baseload
QFs that choose to enter into an ESA or otherwise legally
enforceable obligation after the date of such order issued in
this proceeding may elect to sell their electrical energy and
capacity to electric utilities regulated by the Commission at
forecasted, fixed avoided cost rates calculated at the time the
obligation is incurred under 18 C.F.R. S 292.304(dx2xii)
under a long-term ESAs that does not contain the 90/1 10
Performance Band requirement.
td.
The QF Parties' petition has been Noticed twice by the Commission, and petitions
to intervene have been granted for Tamarack Energy Partnership ("Tamarack") and
Avista Corporation ("Avista"). Since the filing of the QF Parties' Petition, the QF
Petitioners, as well as Commission Staff, have served several lengthy rounds of discovery
upon ldaho Power. The parties to this proceeding have attempted unsuccessfully to
reach agreement as to the scope of this proceeding as well as a procedural schedule,
with those efforts still ongoing. With ldaho Power's cross-petition/petition, ldaho Power
believes that the proper scope and determination requested of the Commission is
applicable to all potential QFs regardless of generation type or geographic location within
the state of ldaho and would be appropriately considered in a GNR, general or generic,
case for the general applicability of the Commission's implementation of PURPA in the
state of Idaho.
The issues raised by the QF Petitioners regarding the Commission requirements
surrounding the 90/110 provisions, and the previous orders of the Commission discussing
the same, as well as the changed circumstances since said orders, necessitates
clarification and revision of the Commission's implementation of 18 C.F.R. S 292.304(d)
for the state of ldaho. The QF Petitioners allege in their petition that the Commission's
IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S CROSS-PETITION AND/OR PETITION TO MODIFY THE 9O/110
FIRMNESS REQUIREMENT FOR ESTABLISHING ELIGIBILITY FOR AVOIDED COST RATES
PURSUANT TO A LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE OBLIGATION - 4
901110 provisions and the requirement to provide "firm" power delivery "does not arise
from, and is contrary to, 18 C.F.R. S 292.304(d), which distinguishes QF energy sold on
an 'as available' basis at the time of delivery ('Non-firm') and energy sold pursuant to a
ESA for delivery over a specified term ('Firm'). See Order No. 181190, U-1006-20.' QF
Parties' Petition at 3-4. ldaho Power disagrees and petitions the Commission to clarify
and modify its provisions regarding firm QF delivery and the Commission's
implementation of 18 C.F.R. S 292.304(d) in ldaho. Contrary to what may be indicated
by the areas of inquiry from the discovery questions delivered to ldaho Power and Avista
thus far, this case and question is not a matter of integration costs, damages, replacement
power costs, forecasts, the utility's risk management, operating plans, or non-
performance penalties; rather, it is a matter of the proper and lawful implementation of
eligibility for firm versus non-firm avoided cost rates for purchases as set forth in 18 C.F.R.
S 292.304(d) in a manner that is not harmful to ldaho Power retail customers.
While the 90/1 10 requirement as a determination of firmness is better than having
no determination of firmness at all, the current implementation of the 901110 requirement
is an insufficient determinant of the firmness of QF generation deliveries, and results in
large amounts of non-firm generation receiving firm generation avoided cost pricing,
locked in for the entire duration of an ESA. This results in overpayment for QF generation,
and harms ldaho Power's retail customers. ldaho Power asks the Commission to clarify
its implementation of PURPA in the state of ldaho with regard to the definition of firmness
for QF generation, and the relationship of that firmness determination to a QF's ability to
establish a legally enforceable obligation and thus gain access to the firm avoided cost
rate that is established at the time of the legally enforceable obligation, as opposed to the
IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S CROSS-PETITION AND/OR PETITION TO MODIFY THE 9O/110
FIRMNESS REQUIREMENT FOR ESTABLISHING ELIGIBILITY FOR AVOIDED COST RATES
PURSUANT TO A LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE OBLIGATION - 5
non-firm avoided cost rate, established at the time of delivery. ldaho Power petitions the
Commission to order that only firm QF generation resources can establish a legally
enforceable obligation and the right to firm avoided cost pricing, locked in for the duration
of their ESA. The definition of a firm QF resource should be the same as the definition of
a firm resource applicable to non-QF generation. The 90/110 definition of firmness should
be modified to require firm scheduled deliveries of QF generation where the QF must
schedule and guarantee the amount of generation that is delivered at a particular time as
firm. All other generation deliveries are non-firm and should be priced accordingly.
This cross-petition and/or petition is further based upon the following:
!II. QF DEVELOPMENT AND COST ON IDAHO POWER'S SYSTEM
ldaho Power has a long history with active PURPA QF projects, and has acquired
a very substantial amount of QF generation that currently operates on its system. The
first QF projects were constructed and started selling their output to ldaho Power under
PURPA in approximately 1982. Attachment 1. For the next 20 years, ldaho Power
accumulated a large number of predominately small hydro PURPA QF projects that
steadily increased and maintained energy deliveries under 200 megawatts ("MW") tota!
generation. /d. To this day, small hydro QFs make up the majority of the number of
PURPA projects under contract with ldaho Power. Attachment 2. ldaho Power has 68
PURPA hydro projects out of a total of 134 PURPA projects under contract. /d. PURPA
hydro, however, provides a relatively small amount of the total PURPA generation. ld.
PURPA hydro provides approximalely 147 MW of the 1,120 MW of total PURPA
nameplate generation capacity that is on-line. ld. Since approximately 2002, ldaho
Power has experienced a dramatic increase in the number and size of PURPA projects,
IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S CROSS-PETITION AND/OR PETITION TO MODIFY THE 9O/110
FIRMNESS REQUIREMENT FOR ESTABLISHING ELIGIBILITY FOR AVOIDED COST RATES
PURSUANT TO A LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE OBLIGATION .6
predominately wind, and now solar, QF projects coming on-line and under contract.
Additionally, many of the early QF hydro generation projects, many of which are members
of the QF Petitioners' organizations, are running the fu!! term of their initial PURPA ESAs,
and have and will be seeking to enter into new obligations with ldaho Power and its
customers. Approximately eight of these existing QF projects have already entered into
replacement, long-term ESAs with ldaho Power. Over the next several years,
approximately 1 more existing QF hydro contract is set to expire tn2018, 9 more ESAs in
2019, 14 more ESAs in 2020, and 18 hydro ESAs thereafter through 2024.
As shown in Attachment 2, as well as the table below, ldaho Power currently has
a total of 1,149 MW of PURPA QF projects under contract. Of that total, 1,120 MW of
capacity from these projects are on-line and operationaltoday. /d. ldaho Power has 627
MW of PURPA wind capacity currently operating on its system. /d The Company has
290 MW of PURPA solar capacity under contract and on-line, an additional 286 MW of
PURPA solar capacity in the queue actively seeking PURPA energy sales agreements,
and 300 MW of additional solar generation seeking to interconnect to ldaho Power's
system. Attachment 1; Attachment 2. ln total, ldaho Power today has 2,290 MW of
PURPA generation operating, under contract, interconnecting, or currently requesting
long-term, fixed-price energy sales agreements to obligate the Company and its
customers. ld. For comparison, total load on ldaho Power's system varies from a
minimum of approximately 1,100 MW to a maximum of approximately 3,400 MW
throughout the year.1
lActual 2017 minimum load was approximately 1,064 MW. ldaho Power's historical record high
peak load was 3,422 MW on July 7,2017.
IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S CROSS-PETITION AND/OR PETITION TO MODIFY THE 9O/110
FIRMNESS REQUIREMENT FOR ESTABLISHING ELIGIBILITY FOR AVOIDED COST RATES
PURSUANT TO A LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE OBLIGATION - 7
Renewable Energy
PURPA Qualifying Facilities
Under Contract and On-!ine
Biomass
CoGen
Thermal
Hydro
Solar
Wind
MW Subtota!
36
16
5
147
290
627
1 20 1 2011
Under Contract, but NOT On-line
Hydro
Solar
2
2729 1,149
Pending (Not Under Gontract, Not On-line)
Biomass
Hydro
Solar
Wind
48
7
586
5001,141 2,290
Non-PURPA Projects
On-line Power Purchase Agreements
Geothermal
Wind
MW Subtotal
35
101
136 136
2,426Total Renewable Energy - PURPA and Non-PURPA
ldaho Power also has an additional 136 MW of non-PURPA renewable generation
under contract. The Company's non-PURPA renewable projects consist of: Elkhorn
Wind, 101 MW; Neal Hot Springs Geothermal,22 MW; Raft RiverGeothermal, 13 MW;
and the Oregon Solar Photovoltaic Pilot Program, 60 projects with 0.46 MW. Attachment
2.
The current customer obligation of $3.4 billion for a!! PURPA generation currently
operating on ldaho Power's system would increase to $4.1 billion with the addition of the
PURPA generation that is currently proposed. Attachment 3; Attachment 4. This
additional obligation and risk borne by customers is being added to the Company's
IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S CROSS-PETITION AND/OR PETITION TO MODIFY THE 9O/110
FIRMNESS REQUIREMENT FOR ESTABLISHING ELIGIBILITY FOR AVOIDED COST RATES
PURSUANT TO A LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE OBLIGATION. S
system at a time when it does not need any additional generation resources to serve
customers' needs well into the future.
At the same time, PURPA power supply expenses are growing at a rapid pace and
becoming quite large. The graph below shows the historical and projected increase in
annual PURPA power supply expense from2004 through 2028, and includes all contracts
signed and approved by the Commission through July 25, 2018.
ldaho Power PURPA Payments
$" "S ,s" "d ,uo. $" ,*" .,S ,S ,$ .,." d d" "^$ ,"- "S ,*" S' d ,6i $" "rd ,*" ,$ $.
As shown in the graph above, annual PURPA power supply expenses in 2004
were approximately $40 million. 2004 approximates the beginning of the addition of large-
scale PURPA wind, under 2O-year, long-term, fixed-rate contracts to ldaho Power's
system. lt took more than 20 years of the accumulation of PURPA contracts to reach the
$40 million in costs seen in 2004. Just five years later, in 2009, the annual power supply
expense grew by 50 percent to approximately $60 million. As more wind was coming
onto the system at a rapid pace, just three years later, in 2012, annual PURPA power
supply expense almost doubled, to nearly $120 million, and eventually leveled off for a
few years just under $150 million. With the rapid addition of the recent PURPA solar
contracts, which came on-line in 2016 and 2017, and additional development of solar,
IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S CROSS-PETITION AND/OR PETITION TO MODIFY THE 90/110
FIRMNESS REQUIREMENT FOR ESTABLISHING ELIGIBILITY FOR AVOIDED COST RATES
PURSUANT TO A LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE OBLIGATION - 9
3m
29
I r*,,,,rllllllllllllll
e
E
hydro, and biomass QFs, PURPA annual power supply expense is estimated to increase
to over $250 million by 2028. This is a staggering 625 percent increase in annual PURPA
power supply expense in approxim ately 24 years, over the previous 20 years. This growth
trend continues during a time when ldaho Power has no identified need for new
generation resources identified by its lntegrated Resource Plan ("lRP"). The Company is
capacity sufficient through 2026, and energy sufficient beyond the next decade.
ln addition, ldaho Power's average cost of PURPA generation included in base
rates is $63.49/megawatt-hour ("MWh"). This price is always high when compared to
current alternatives. ldaho Power's avoided cost, established through the avoided cost
methodologies approved by the Commission, has historically exceeded market price, and
is projected to always exceed market price into the future as shown in the graph below.
AveEge PURPA Price vs, Mid-C lndex
110
1m
s
m
70
I*
50
&
to
20
10
------=-" -
2mo 2m2 )@4 2@6 2ma 2010 2012 2014 2016 201 A 2020 2022 2024 2026 2024 2030 2032 2034 2036
-PURPA
Hi5toric.l
-
Mid c Historicrl -
PURPA foNard ftke Obtigationt
- - Mid C Futures *ttled kices
The cost of PURPA generation, on a dollars per MWh basis, is not just greater
than Mid-C market prices, it is greater than all the net power supply cost components
IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S CROSS-PETITION AND/OR PETITION TO MODIFY THE 9O/110
FIRMNESS REQUIREMENT FOR ESTABLISHING ELIGIBILITY FOR AVOIDED COST RATES
PURSUANT TO A LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE OBLIGATION - 1O
currently recovered in rates: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ("FERC") Account
501, Coal; FERC Account 547, Natural Gas; FERC Account 555, Non-PURPA
Purchases; and FERC Account 447, Surplus Sales. At $63.49 per MWh, the average
cost of PURPA purchases is greater than the average cost of coal at $29.40 per MWh,
greater than gas at $29.75 per MWh, greater than non-PURPA purchases of $47.60 per
MWh, and significantly greater than what is being sold as surplus sales at $25.73 per
MWh. Attachment 5. This economic relationship between PURPA and the Company's
other power costs illustrates that as the Company is required to purchase unneeded
PURPA generation, it may be required to back down or curtail other less expensive
sources of generation or market purchases in order to continue purchasing PURPA
generation at a higher cost. This would mean that the Company's overall net power
supply expense, on a dollars per MWh basis, would increase, adversely impacting
customers.
The large disparity between the cost of ldaho Power's PURPA power supply
expense and other generation, as well as the gross exceedance in all years of market
prices for equivalent, and the often more valuable and firm, market generation prices, is
largely a result of the current implementation of 18 C.F.R. S 292.304(d) and the 90/110
provisions that unreasonably allow large amounts of non-firm QF generation to establish
long-term lock-ins of firm rates pursuant to a legally enforceable obligation. If much of
the QF, non-firm generation were more appropriately priced as-available, then the
PURPA power supply expense would at least start to move closer to a market price.
The Commission in its approval of the last 11 large PURPA QF solar ESAs with
ldaho Power has questioned the continued acquisition of such large amounts of PURPA
IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S CROSS-PETITION AND/OR PETITION TO MODIFY THE 9O/110
FIRMNESS REQUIREMENT FOR ESTABLISHING ELIGIBILITY FOR AVOIDED COST RATES
PURSUANT TO A LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE OBLIGATION - 11
generation when there is not an associated need for that generation on ldaho Power's
system.2 The Commission stated in those orders, "Unfortunately, PURPA does not
address and FERC regulation does not adequately provide for consideration of whether
the utility being forced to purchase QF power is actually in need of such energy." See fn.
2. ldaho Power currently has generation capacity sufficient to reliably serve customers'
peak consumption, or demand, through the year 2026, and has sufficient resources to
meet customers' energy consumption until 2029. 2017 lRP, Appendix C: Technical
Report at 31, 49. Additionally, the Company's 2017 IRP has identified the Boardman to
Hemingway transmission line as the primary resource in the near-term action plan. The
Boardman to Hemingway transmission line would serve additional growth for years
beyond the next identified need in 2026 without adding any new generation plants.
The Commission has previously expressed concern about passing those
substantial costs for unneeded resources on to ldaho Power customers. The
Commission concluded each of the orders, footnoted above, with expression of its
concern about ldaho Power's ability to continue to take such large amounts of intermittent
generation stating, "While we are pleased with the progression of the IRP methodology,
avoided cost rates are not the only terms to a PURPA contract. The utilities are in the
best position to inform the Commission if review of additional PURPA contract terms and
conditions is warranted." See fn.2.
The requested modification to the 90/110 requirements and a revised
implementation of eligibility to form a legally enforceable obligation and entitlement to firm
avoided cost rates is necessary to prevent further harm to ldaho Power's customers that
2 Order Nos. 33198 at5-7;33199 at 5-7; 33200 at5-7;33201at5-6; 33202 at 5-6; 33204 at6-7;
33205 at6-7;33206 at7-8;33207 at 6-8; 33208 at 6-8; 33209 at 6-8.
IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S CROSS-PETITION AND/OR PETITION TO MODIFY THE 9O/110
FIRMNESS REQUIREMENT FOR ESTABLISHING ELIGIBILITY FOR AVOIDED COST RATES
PURSUANT TO A LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE OBLIGATION . 12
may result from entering into additional long-term, fixed-rate purchase
agreements/obligations, not only when there is no need for such generation, but also
improperly paying the firm avoided cost rate for non-firm QF generation, thus passing on
such overpayment to customers. ldaho Power should not be obligated to enter into
prospective long-term contracts that pay for firm generation but receive a non-firm
product, nor should ldaho Power customers be obligated to pay for such long-term
purchases as firm deliveries when they are actually providing much less valuable, non-
firm generation and power production.
IV. DISCUSSION
A.round-PURPA and Firm Versus Non-Firm Prici
Sections 201 and 210 oi PURPA require electric utilities to offer to purchase
electric energy from qualifying cogeneration and sma!! power production facilities. 16
USC S 824a-3(a). PURPA further specifies that the purchase rates set by state
commissions for electric utility purchases of energy generated by QFs may not exceed
the incremental cost to the electric utility of alternative electric energy. 16 USC $ 824a-
3(b) PURPA defines incrementa! cost as the cost to the electric utility of the electric
energy which, but for the purchase from such QFs, such utility would generate or
purchase from another source. 16 USC $ 824a-3(d). PURPA also requires state
commissions to set the rates for purchases of power from QFs at levels that are just and
reasonable to the utility's customers and in the public interest and that do not discriminate
against QFs, but that are not more than avoided costs. 16 USC $ 824a-3(b)(1) and (2).
Congress enacted PURPA to encourage the development of cogeneration and
small power production facilities, and directed FERC to promulgate regulations to further
IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S CROSS-PETITION AND/OR PETITION TO MODIFY THE 9O/110
FIRMNESS REQUIREMENT FOR ESTABLISHING ELIGIBILITY FOR AVOIDED COST RATES
PURSUANT TO A LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE OBLIGATION - 13
this goal. 16 U.S.C. $ 824a-3(a); FERC v. Mississippi, 456 U.5.742,750-51, 102 S.Ct.
2126,72L.Ed.2d 532 (1982). PURPA also requires that the state regulatory authorities,
such as the ldaho Public Utilities Commission, implement the FERC regulations. 16
U.S.C. $ 824a-3(f). !n FERC v. Mlssissippi, the U.S. Supreme Court found that a state
may comply with its obligation to implement PURPA and FERC regulations "by issuing
regulations, by resolving disputes on a case-by-case basis, or by taking any other action
reasonably designed to give effect to FERC's rules." 456 U.S. at751, 102 S.Ct . 2126,72
L.Ed.2d 532. FERC has further stated that states may fulfill the requirement to implement
its rules by "either 1) through the enactment of laws or regulations at the State level; 2)
by application on a case-by-case basis by the State regulatory authority, or nonregulated
utility, of the rules adopted by the Commission [FERC]; or 3) by any other action
reasonably designed to implement the Commission's [FERC's] rules." Policy Statement
Regarding the Commission's Enforcement Role Under Secfion 210 of the Public Utility
Regulatory Policies Act of 1978,23 FERC P 61304, 61644, 1983 WL 39627 (May 31,
1 e83).
With regard to the rates for purchases by utilities from QFs, FERC outlines, among
other requirements, that such purchases be priced either at the time of delivery, or at the
time a legally enforceable obligation, or contract, is incurred. 18 C.F.R. S 292.304.
FERC's regulation states:
(d) Purchases "as available" or pursuant to a legally
enforceable obligation. Each qualifying facility shall have the
option either:
(1) To provide energy as the qualifying facility determines
such energy to be available for such purchases, in which case
the rates for such purchases shall be based on the purchasing
utility's avoided costs calculated at the time of delivery; or
IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S CROSS-PETITION AND/OR PETITION TO MODIFY THE 9O/110
FIRMNESS REQUIREMENT FOR ESTABLISHING ELIGIBILITY FOR AVOIDED COST RATES
PURSUANT TO A LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE OBLIGATION - 14
(2) To provide energy or capacity pursuant to a legally
enforceable obligation for the delivery of energy or capacity
over a specified term, in which case the rates for such
purchases shall, at the option of the qualifying facility
exercised prior to the beginning of the specified term, be
based on either:
(i) The avoided costs calculated at the time of delivery; or
(ii) The avoided costs calculated at the time the obligation
is incurred.
18 C.F.R. S 2e2.304(d).
The Commission has implemented the provisions of 18 C.F.R. S 292.304, Rates
for Purchases, with regard to ldaho Power by making available the two pricing options
referred to in $ 292.304(d). First, in accordance with 18 C.F.R. S 292.304(dX1), a QF
may elect to sell "as available" pursuant to ldaho Power's Tariff Schedule 86,
Cogeneration and Small Power Production Non-Firm Energy. IPUC No. 29, Tariff No.
101, Sheet No. 86-1 through 86-7. This pricing option is available for QFs choosing to
provide non-firm generation, or provided as the QF determines such generation to be
available, and receives rates based upon the utility's avoided cost at the time of delivery.
Second, in accordance with 18 C.F.R. S 292.304(dX2), for QFs that demonstrate by
compliance with 901110 that they are providing "firm" deliveries, such QFs may elect to
have pricing established either at the time of delivery, as in 18 C.F.R. S 292.304(1), or at
the time of contracting, or when the obligation is incurred. The Commission
independently reviews each QF ESA, and Commission approval of each agreement,
including its prices, terms, and conditions is required prior to such agreement being
effective.
IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S CROSS-PETITION AND/OR PETITION TO MODIFY THE 90/110
FIRMNESS REQUIREMENT FOR ESTABLISHING ELIGIBILITY FOR AVOIDED COST RATES
PURSUANT TO A LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE OBLIGATION - 15
B The Gommission has Exclusive Authoritv to Determine Firmness
Requirements for the Establishment of a Legally Entqreeable Obliqation ad
Firm Avoided Cost Pricinq.
A state regulatory commission charged with the implementation of PURPA has the
exclusive authority to determine within its discretion the parameters for creating a legally
enforceable obligation, including when it is created. Exelon Wind 1, L.L.C., v. Ne/son,
766 F.3d 380 (sth Cu.2010; ldaho Power Co., v. ldaho Pub. Util. Comm.,'155 ldaho 780,
316 P.3d 1278 (2013) ("Grouse CreeK'). A state commission's determination that only
firm QF resources can create a legally enforceable obligation and that all non-firm
resources could only receive the "as available" avoided cost rate has been confirmed by
Federal Court as a lawful and proper implementation of PURPA. Exelon Wind 1, L.L.C.,
v. Nelson,766 F.3d 380 (sth Cr.2014).
In the Exelon Wind v. Nelson case, supra, Exelon Wind, a QF, sought contracts
with Southwestern, a utility required to purchase QF generation under PURPA. ld., at
386. Exelon sent letters to Southwestern demanding that Southwestern purchase
Exelon's energy output for the next 20 years, and purported to create legally enforceable
obligations with Southwestern. ld. Southwestern refused to purchase Exelon's
generation stating that the rates demanded by Exelon exceeded the as-available prices
and that Exelon could not form a legally enforceable obligation, nor receive such avoided
cost rates, because it could not provide firm power. ld. Exelon filed a complaint with the
Texas PUC. ld. The Texas PUC held that Exelon's power was non-firm, that it had not
created a legally enforceable obligation, and that it was only entitled to as-available rates.
ld., at 386-87. Exelon appealed the Texas PUC's ruling to the state district court in Texas,
and at the same time filed a petition for enforcement and request for declaratory order
IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S CROSS-PETITION AND/OR PETITION TO MODIFY THE 9O/110
FIRMNESS REQUIREMENT FOR ESTABLISHING ELIGIBILITY FOR AVOIDED COST RATES
PURSUANT TO A LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE OBLIGATION - 16
with FERC. ld., at 387. FERC declined to initiate an enforcement action against the
Texas PUC, but issued a declaratory order stating that the Texas PUC's order was
inconsistent with FERC's Regulation and that a QF could form a legally enforceable
obligation even if its power is non-firm. /d. Exelon then non-suited its state court appeal
and filed an action in federal district court seeking declaratory and injunctive relief against
the Texas PUC Commissioners arguing among other claims that all QFs could form
legally enforceable obligations, and that the Texas PUC's rule and orders did not properly
implement FERC's PURPA regulations. /d., at 387-88. The federaldistrict court granted
summary judgment in favor of Exelon concluding that the Texas PUC's order failed to
implement PURPA and permanently enjoined the Texas PUC from requiring a QF to
provide firm power as a condition of creating a legally enforceable obligation. ld., at 388.
The Texas PUC, Southwestern, and Occidental (Southwestern's largest customer)
appealed to the United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. /d.
The Fifth Circuit reversed the federal district court's ruling and, in so doing,
determined that several of Exelon's claims were as-applied challenges, which were within
the exclusive jurisdiction and authority of the state to determine. ld., at 388-94. The Fifth
Circuit directed the district courtto dismiss forwant of subject matter jurisdiction allclaims
determined by the Fifth Circuit to be as-applied claims, and proceeded to determine only
Exelon's remaining claim that the Texas PUC's rule fails to implement FERC's
regulations. ld., at 394.
The Texas PUC had passed an administrative rule with regard to implementation
of 18 C.F.R. S 292.304(d) limiting establishment of legally enforceable obligations and the
associated pricing to firm resources only. /d., at 385.
IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S CROSS-PETITION AND/OR PETITION TO MODIFY THE 9O/110
FIRMNESS REQUIREMENT FOR ESTABLISHING ELIGIBILITY FOR AVOIDED COST RATES
PURSUANT TO A LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE OBLIGATION - 17
The [Texas] PUC's rule implementing FERC's Regulation
permits only a Qualifying Facility that generates "firm power"
to enter into a Legally Enforceable Obligation. 16 Tex. Admin.
Code $25.2a2@) (PUC Ru\e25.242). The PUC defines "firm
power" as "power or power-producing capaci$ [from a
Qualifying Facilityl that is available pursuant to a legally
enforceable obligation for scheduled availability over a
specified term." ld.525.242(c)(5). The [Texas] PUC defines
non-firm power from a Qualifying Facility as "[p]ower provided
under an arrangement that does not guarantee scheduled
availability, but instead provides for delivery as available." ld.
$25.2a2@Xg). ln otherwords, only those Qualifying Facilities
able to forecast when they will deliver energy to the utility -
and capable of delivering the specified amount of energy at
the scheduled time - are eligible to take advantage of the
pricing options in subsection (d)(2) of FERC's Regulation [18
C.F.R. S 292.304(d)1. By contract, Qualifying Facilities with
non-firm power that cannot guarantee such delivery may
charge the utility only the current or "as-available" market
price for the power.
Exelon Wind 1, L.L.C., v.Ne/son, 766 F.3d 380, 385-86 (sth Cr.2O14)
In reversing and remanding the district court's decision, the Fifth Circuit
summarized its determination as follows:
ln sum, Exelon has failed to show that PURPA and FERC's
Regulation mandate that all Qualifying Facilities be able to
create Legally Enforceable Obligations at any time. PURPA
allows states discretion in determining when a Legally
Enforceable Obligation is created, and [Texas] PUC Rule
25.242 falls within that discretion. The PUC is therefore
entitled to deference in defining the parameters for creating
Legally Enforceable Obligations. Here, the PUC has
reasonably distinguished between Qualifying Facilities that
can, and cannot, provide firm power. As Occidenta! notes,
mandatory long-term contracts between generators and
utilities can burden customers by imposing prices well above
the actual market prices. The PUC made a reasonable
decision that only those Qualifying Facilities capable of
providing reliable and predictable power may enter into such
arrangements. Thus, Exelon has not proven that the PUC
failed to implement FERC's PURPA regulations.
ld., a1400 (citations omitted).
IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S CROSS-PETITION AND/OR PETITION TO MODIFY THE 9O/110
FIRMNESS REQUIREMENT FOR ESTABLISHING ELIGIBILITY FOR AVOIDED COST RATES
PURSUANT TO A LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE OBLIGATION . 18
Eligibility for a legally enforceable obligation and the associated rates determined
at the time such obligation is incurred is an extremely important determination and
condition of the obligation, contract, and sale from a QF to a utility and its customers. The
price, terms, and conditions in a mandatory PURPA purchase, when the QF elects rates
determined at the time of contracting/obligation for the duration of the contract, cannot be
changed, adjusted, or affected at all, once approved and effective. FERC's view with
regard to the Commission's inclusion of costs in long-term contracts was discussed in an
ldaho Power case. ldaho Wind Partners 1, L.L.C., Docket No. EL12-74-000,140 FERC
!t 61.219 (September 20, 2012)(Order Granting Petition for Declaratory Order);
EL12-74-001, 143 FERC 1161,248 (June 20,2013) (Order on Rehearing). ln the Idaho
Wind Partners case, FERC insisted that all long-term PURPA contracts containing rates
established at the time of contracting wi!! be assumed to include all costs, even in the face
of direct evidence that certain costs were not included in the avoided cost rates at the
time of contracting. Order on Rehearing, supra. Additionally, FERC's position is that
once avoided cost rates are established in the contract at the time of contracting, they
cannot subsequently be changed. /d. While FERC's position is that the state commission
may not change or revise a PURPA contract during its term because such action may
constitute utilitytype regulation of a QF in violation of 18 C.l.*.S 292.602(c)(1), the state
commission may review and approve a PURPA contract at the time it is submitted by the
parties for final approval, in furtherance of its state duty to ensure that the agreement is
consistent with the public interest. Crossroads Cogeneration Corp. v. Orange & Rockland
Utilities, lnc., 159 F.3d 129, 138 (3d Cir.1998)("ln other words, while PURPA allows the
appropriate state regulatory agency to approve a power purchasing agreement, once
IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S CROSS-PETITION AND/OR PETITION TO MODIFY THE 9O/110
FIRMNESS REQUIREMENT FOR ESTABLISHING ELIGIBILITY FOR AVOIDED COST RATES
PURSUANT TO A LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE OBLIGATION - 19
such an agreement is approved, the state agency is not permitted to modify the terms of
the agreement.").
The Commission has the obligation to ensure that the avoided cost rate and the
purchase of QF generation is just and reasonable to the utility's customers, in the public
interest, and that customers are not harmed by the PURPA QF obligation. lnherent in
that authority is the ability and authority to determine the appropriate conditions of the
purchase and sale, and specifically to require firm delivery as a condition of establishing
a legally enforceable obligation and the associated pricing. The ldaho Supreme Court
has upheld the Commission's authority and procedure by which it approves or
disapproves PURPA power sales agreements and determines whether a legally
enforceable obligation exists that would bind the QF, utility, and its customers even in the
absence of a contract. ldaho Power Co., v. ldaho Pub. Util. Comm.,155 ldaho 780, 316
P.3d 1278 (2013X"Grouse CreeK'). Determination of the proper terms and conditions of
a required PURPA ESA, including the authority to require firm power deliveries in order
to be eligible for the firm avoided cost rate, is soundly, and completely, within the authority
and discretion of the Commission.
V. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, ldaho Power respectfully requests:
1. That the Commission clarify and modify its previous orders and direction
with regard to the 901110 requirement, QF firm delivery standards, and the Commission's
implementation of FERC Regulation 18 C.F.R. S 292.304(d) by: (1) permitting only QFs
that generate "firm power" to enter into legally enforceable obligations and receive the
associated pricing determined at the time such obligations are incurred; (2) defining "firm
IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S CROSS-PETITION AND/OR PETITION TO MODIFY THE 9O/110
FIRMNESS REQUIREMENT FOR ESTABLISHING ELIGIBILITY FOR AVOIDED COST RATES
PURSUANT TO A LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE OBLIGATION - 20
power" as power or power producing capacity from a QF that is available pursuant to a
legally enforceable obligation for scheduled delivery of a specified amount of generation
delivered at a specified time; and (3) defining "non-firm power" as power provided under
an arrangement that does not guarantee scheduled availability, but instead provides for
delivery as available; and
2. That the Commission consider ldaho Power's cross-petition/petition and the
QF Parties' petition in one consolidated proceeding applicable to all QFs and utilities; and
3. That the Commission deny the QF Parties' requested relief with regard to
any change or revision to the collection of O&M charges as authorized by ldaho Power's
Schedule 72; and
4. That the Commission direct any other relief deemed appropriate and in the
public interest.
Respectfully submitted this 25th day of July 2018.
c
E. WALKER
Attorney for ldaho Power Company
IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S CROSS-PETITION AND/OR PETITION TO MODIFY THE 9O/110
FIRMNESS REQUIREMENT FOR ESTABLISHING ELIGIBILITY FOR AVOIDED COST RATES
PURSUANT TO A LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE OBLIGATION - 21
CERT!FICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 25th day of July 2018 I served a true and correct
copy of IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S CROSS-PETITION AND/OR PETITION TO
MODIFY THE 9O/110 FIRMNESS REQUIREMENT FOR ESTABLISHING ELIGIBILITY
FOR AVOIDED COST RATES PURSUANT TO A LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE
OBLIGATION upon the following named parties by the method indicated below, and
addressed to the following:
Gommission Staff
Edith L. Pacillo
Edward Jewell
Deputy Attorneys General
!daho Public Utilities Commission
472 West Washington (83702)
P.O. Box 83720
Boise, ldaho 83720-007 4
J.R. Simplot Company
Peter J. Richardson
Gregory M. Adams
RICHARDSON ADAMS, PLLC
515 North 27th Street (83702)
P.O. Box 7218
Boise, ldaho 83707
Idahydro and Shorock Hydro, Inc.
C. Tom Arkoosh
ARKOOSH LAW OFFICES
802 West Bannock Street, Suite 900
P.O. Box 2900
Boise, ldaho 83701
Renewable Energy Coalition
J. Kahle Becker
Attorney at Law
223 North 6th Street, Suite 325
Boise, ldaho 83702
!rion Sanger
SANGER LAW, P.C.
1117 SW 53rd Avenue
Portland, Oregon 97215
X Hand Delivered
_U.S. Mail
_Overnight Mail
_FAXX Email [e-mail]
edwa rd. iewel l@ p uc. ida ho. qov
_Hand DeliveredX U.S. Mail
_Overnight Mail
_FAXX Emai! [e-mail]
[e-mail]
_Hand DeliveredX U.S. Mail
_Overnight Mail
_FAXX Email tom.arkoosh arkoosh.com
_Hand DeliveredX U.S. Mail
_Overnight Mail
_FAX
X Email kah le@kahlebeckerlaursam
_Hand DeliveredX U.S. Mail
_Overnight Mail
_FAXX Email [e-mail]
IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S CROSS-PETITION AND/OR PETITION TO MODIFY THE 9O/110
FIRMNESS REQUIREMENT FOR ESTABLISHING ELIGIBILITY FOR AVOIDED COST RATES
PURSUANT TO A LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE OBLIGATION -22
Tamarack Energy Partnership
Michael C. Creamer
Preston N. Carter
GIVENS PURSLEY LLP
601 West Bannock Street (83702)
P.O. Box 2720
Boise, ldaho 83701
_Hand DeliveredX U.S. Mai!
_Overnight Mail
_FAX
X Email [e-mail]
pnc@givenspu rsley. com
Avista Corporation
Michael G. Andrea, Senior Counsel
Avista Corporation
1411 East Mission Avenue, MSC-23
Spokane, Wash ingt on 99202
_Hand DeliveredX U.S. Mai!
_Overnight Mail
_FAXX Email [e-mail]
Clint Kalich
Manager, Resource Planning and Analysis
Avista Corporation
1411 East Mission Avenue, MSC-7
Spokane, Wash ingt on 99202
_Hand DeliveredX U.S. Mail
_Overnight Mai!
_FAXX Email [e-mail]
Christa Bearry, Legal
IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S CROSS-PETITION AND/OR PETITION TO MODIFY THE 9O/110
FIRMNESS REQUIREMENT FOR ESTABLISHING ELIGIBILITY FOR AVOIDED COST RATES
PURSUANT TO A LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE OBLIGATION - 23
BEFORE THE
IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
GASE NO. IPC-E-I8-07
IDAHO POWER COMPANY
ATTACHMENT 1
%
%o,
eb?
"rr,
+oa
,,,,
,,,,
,%
%,
%,
%,
%,
,%
"q?
%,
qt
qt,
+6I
%u,
bet
+r"SREEEEEESESE
(mw)
spernela61
Ito
eo&
=E<oavO
EEH9tr
Ee_>
=E-?RE:
!l 6o
63
CI
cc:6.
-\
r-I5 tP
tr5*
T
E
I
Ir
&I
=Ee
o
c
c
a
o
co
&oEt
eoO
E
=
ooo
ac,
a
E
5
TTE?:Elso
=Ia
;o
€Faa
o
coo
E
ooa
ec,=e
a t
E
$
ffi
,
ire
$
iri
i-,
:TTl6o
ot
$
iri
I!
s
i:;
trge
o
BEFORE THE
IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
CASE NO. IPC-E-I8-07
IDAHO POWER COMPANY
ATTACHMENT 2
ldaho Power Company
Renewable Energy Project List
as of 712412018
For Projects in: lD, MT, OR
SUMMARY
PURPA Projects
OregonSolar Projects
Non PURPA Projects
134
60
3
1,148.99 MW
0.46 MW
135.65 MW
197
SUMMARY BY FACILITY TYPE
1,285.09 MW
PURPA PROJECTS ONLINE
Biomass
CoGen
Solar
Thermal
Hydro
Wind
11
1
14
2
68
32
35.70 MW
15.90 MW
289.50 MW
5.00 MW
147.12 MW
626.92 MW
128 1,120.14 MW
PURPA PROJECTS UNDER CONTRACT NOT YET ONLINE
Solar
Hydro
5
1
26.75 MW
2.10 MW
6 28.85 MW
OregonSolar PROJECTS ONLINE
OR Solar 60 0.46 MW
60 0.46 MW
Non PURPA PROJECTS ONLINE
Geothermal
Wind
2
1
35.00 MW
100.65 MW
135.65 MW
Totals Projects Capacity
197
1-Renewable Energy Project List Page 1
1,285.09 MW
3
Idaho Power Gompany
Renewable Energy Project List
as of 712412018
For Projects in: lD, MT, OR
PROJECT DETAILS
PURPA PROJECTS ONLINE
Project
Number
Facility
Iype LMW)
CountyStateProject Name
31616150 Biomass
41365515 Biomass
31615100 Biomass
31616100 Biomass
31616115 Biomass
21865113 Biomass
21615100 Biomass
41455091 Biomass
316161 10 Biomass
20170214 Biomass
'1 1766004 Biomass
Total Biomass Projects
86 Anaerobic Digester
Bannock County Landfill
Bettencourt Dry Creek Biofactory
Big Sky West Dairy Digester (DF-AP #1, LLC)
Double A Digester Project
Fighting Creek Landfill Gas to Energy Station
Hidden Hollow Landfill Gas
Pocatello Waste
Rock Creek Dairy
SISW LFGE
Tamarack CSPP
11
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
lD Power
Gooding
Bannock
Twin Falls
Gooding
Lincoln
Kootenai
Ada
Bannock
Twin Falls
Cassia
Adams
Power
Power
Elmore
Malheur
Malheur
Ada
Elmore
Owyhee
Malheur
Ada
Malheur
Elmore
Malheur
Malheur
2.28
3.20
2.25
1.50
4.50
3.06
3.20
0.46
4.00
5.00
6.25
35.70
15.90
15.90
20.00
20.00
80.00
6.00
9.00
40.00
20.00
20.00
10.00
20.00
4.50
20.00
10.00
10.00
289.s0
41875695 CoGen Simplot - Pocatello
TotalCoGen Projects: 1
25586937 Solar
25591644 Solar
12616100 Solar
12727358 Solar
12739324 Solar
25088520 Solar
25031625 Solar
25524198 Solar
12705219 Solar
25573998 Solar
12741175 Solar
25580735 Solar
12745920 Solar
12719362 Solar
Total Solar Projects: 14
American Falls Solar ll, LLC
American Falls Solar, LLC
Grand View PV Solar Two
Grove Solar Center, LLC
Hyline Solar Center, LLC
lD Solar 1
Mt. Home Solar 1, LLC
Murphy Flat Power, LLC
Open Range Solar Center, LLC
Orchard Ranch Solar, LLC
Railroad Solar Center, LLC
Simcoe Solar, LLC
Thunderegg Solar Center, LLC
Vale Air Solar Center, LLC
1-Renewable Energy Project List
ID
ID
ID
OR
OR
ID
ID
ID
OR
ID
OR
ID
OR
OR
Page 2
trrnianlSizp
ldaho Power Company
Renewable Energy Project List
as of 712412018
For Projects in: lD, MT, OR
PURPA PROJECTS ONLINE
Proiect
Number
Facilitv
fyPe (MW)
CounWStatee&jcelName
21662100 Thermal Tasco - NamPa
31616082 Thermal Tasco - Twin Falls
Total Thermal Projects: 2
ID
ID
ID
OR
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
Canyon
Twin Falls
Canyon
Baker
Ada
Gooding
Gooding
Gooding
Gooding
Twin Falls
Twin Falls
Jerome
Twin Falls
Twin Falls
Twin Falls
Twin Falls
Twin Falls
Jerome
Lemhi
ldaho
Fremont
Canyon
Gooding
Gooding
Lincoln
Blaine
Jerome
Jerome
Jerome
Boise
Gooding
2.00
3.00
5.00
216'.t5205
20150601
21615078
31214058
3141 5065
20140708
31 61 5140
31 41 601 3
31 51 51 00
31715126
31416020
31616081
315't6014
31 61 5057
314',t5025
31 61 51 06
44395973
11615077
41717137
216152',t5
31615121
31415134
31 61 5098
31 31 5093
31715128
31715140
20140328
11715144
3141 5094
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Arena Drop
Baker City Hydro
Barber Dam
Birch Creek
Black Canyon #3
Black Canyon Bliss Hydro
Blind Canyon
Box Canyon
Briggs Creek
Bypass
Canyon Springs
Cedar Draw
Clear Springs Trout
Crystal Springs
Curry Cattle Company 2018
Dietrich Drop
Eightmile Hydro Project
Elk Creek
Falls River
Fargo Drop Hydroelectric
Faulkner Ranch
Fisheries Dev.
Geo-Bon #2
Hailey Cspp
Hazelton A
Hazelton B
Head of U Canal Project
Horseshoe Bend Hydro
Jim Knight
1-Renewable Energy Project List
0.45
0.24
3.70
0.05
0.14
0.03
1.63
0.36
0.60
9.96
0.13
1.55
0.52
2.44
0.25
4.50
0.36
2.00
9.10
1.27
0.87
0.26
0.93
0.06
8.10
7.60
1.28
9.50
0.34
Page 3
ProieclSize
ldaho Power Company
Renewable Energy Project List
as of 712412018
For Projects in: lD, MT, OR
PURPA PROJECTS ONLINE
Project
Number
Facility
Iype tMw)
CountyStategrsjeet]lame
31 61 5031
31615030
31 61 5056
31 31 601 5
315151 10
31 61 51 05
31 51 51 07
31 71 5099
31 61 51 30
3161s',t25
31715123
31 51 5009
31615117
31 61 51 54
12614070
21615200
31 51 5005
31414111
20150729
12616071
31 61 5067
31 41 51 66
31415167
21415119
31 61 5004
31 61 51 04
31 51 51 03
31 61 71 00
41515122
11415010
316'15158
31416002
0.90
1.25
2.06
0.08
1.25
2.85
0.87
7.97
2.50
2.79
9.07
0.62
1.20
1.50
2.09
'1.85
0.52
0.21
1.30
5.00
1.89
0.10
0.20
0.26
2.17
1.90
0.43
0.50
0.53
0.22
0.58
0.36
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Kasel & Witherspoon
Koyle Small Hydro
Lateral# 10
Lemoyne
Little Wood River Ranch ll
Little Wood Rvr Res
Littlewood / Arkoosh
Low Line Canal
Low Line Midway Hydro
Lowline #2
Magic Reservoir
Malad River
Marco Ranches
Mile 28
Mitchell Butte
Mora Drop Small Hydroelectric Facility
Mud Creek S and S
Mud CreekMhite
North Gooding Main Hydro
Owyhee Dam Cspp
Pigeon Cove
Pristine Springs #1
Pristine Springs #3
Reynolds lrrigation
Rock Creek #1
Rock Creek #2
Sagebrush
Sahko Hydro
Schaffner
Shingle Creek
Shoshone #2
Shoshone CSPP
1-Renewable Energy Project List
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
OR
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
OR
Twin Falls
Gooding
Twin Falls
Gooding
Shoshone
Blaine
Lincoln
Twin Falls
Twin Falls
Twin Falls
Blaine
Gooding
Jerome
Jerome
Malheur
Ada
Twin Falls
Twin Falls
Lincoln
Malheur
Twin Falls
Jerome
Jerome
Canyon
Twin Falls
Twin Falls
Lincoln
Twin Falls
Lemhi
ldaho County
Lincoln
Lincoln
Page 4
h--:^ ^14:--
ldaho Power Company
Renewable Energy Project List
as of 712412018
For Projects in: ID, MT, OR
PURPA PROJECTS ONLINE
Project
Number
Facility
Type
ProjectSize
(Mw)
CountyStateProject Name
31315021 Hydro Snake River Pottery
31414075 Hydro Snedigar
41717139 Hydro Tiber Dam
31415027 Hydro Trout-Co
12616072 Hydro Tunnel #1
31315029 Hydro White Water Ranch
31715141 Hydro Wilson Lake Hydro
Total Hydro Projects: 68
21615101 Wind Bennett Creek Wind Farm
12618240 Wind Benson Creek Windfarm
31765170 Wind Burley Butte Wind Park
31315050 Wind Camp Reed Wind Park
31318100 Wind Cassia Wind Farm LLC
21615115 Wind Cold Springs Windfarm
21615120 Wind Desert Meadow Windfarm
12618230 Wind Durbin Creek Windfarm
31315035 Wind FossilGulch Wind
31765160 Wind Golden Valley Wind Park
2'1615125Wind HammettHillWindfarm
31315130 Wind High Mesa Wind Project
41718140 Wind Horseshoe Bend Wind
21615105 Wind Hot Springs Wind Farm
12618220 Wind Jett Creek Windfarm
12618200 Wind Lime Wind Energy
21615130 Wind Mainline Windfarm
31720'190 Wind Milner Dam Wind
31315075 Wind Oregon TrailWind Park
31315060 Wind Payne's Ferry Wind Park
31315045 Wind Pilgrim Stage Station Wind Park
12618210 Wind Prospector Windfarm
4'1455300 Wind Rockland Wind Farm
21615135 Wind Ryegrass Windfarm
1-Renewable Energy Project List
ID
ID
MT
ID
OR
Gooding
Twin Falls
Liberty County
Gooding
Malheur
Gooding
Jerome
Elmore
Baker
Cassia
Elmore
Twin Falls
Elmore
Elmore
Baker
Twin Falls
Cassia
Elmore
Twin Falls/Elmore
Cascade
Elmore
Baker
Baker
Elmore
Cassia
Twin Falls
Twin Falls
Twin Falls
Baker
Power
Elmore
0.07
0.54
7.50
0.24
7.00
0.16
8.40
147.12
ID
ID
ID
OR
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
OR
ID
ID
ID
ID
MT
ID
OR
OR
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
OR
ID
ID
21.00
10.00
21.30
22.50
10.50
23.00
23.00
10.00
10.50
12.00
23.00
40.00
9.00
21.00
10.00
3.00
23.00
19.92
13.50
21.00
10.50
10.00
80.00
23.00
Page 5
Idaho Power Company
Renewable Energy Project List
as of 712412018
For Projects in: lD, MT, OR
PURPA PROJECTS ONLINE
31618100 Wind
21615110 Wind
31315055 Wind
31315065 Wind
31315150 Wind
21615140 Wind
12618245 Wind
31315070 Wind
TotalWind Projects: 32
Salmon Falls Wind
Sawtooth Wind Project
Thousand Springs Wind Park
Tuana Gulch Wind Park
Tuana Springs Expansion
Two Ponds Windfarm
Willow Spring Windfarm
Yahoo Creek Wind Park
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
ID
OR
ID
Twin Falls
Elmore
Twin Falls
Twin Falls
Twin Falls
Elmore
Baker
Twin Falls
22.00
22.00
12.00
10.50
35.70
23.00
10.00
21.00
626.92
Project
Number
Facility
Type
ProjectSize
(MW)
Project Name State County
1-Renewable Energy Project List Page 6
ldaho Power Gompany
Renewable Energy Project List
as of 712412018
For Projects in: lD, MT, OR
PURPA PROJECTS UNDER CONTRACT NOT YET ONLINE
Project
Number
Facility
Tyoe (MW)
CountyProject Name State
12992535 Solar
12975375 Solar
12985329 Solar
20180124 Solar
12963059 Solar
TotalSolar Projects: 5
Baker Solar Center
Brush Solar
Morgan Solar
Ontario Solar Center
Vale I Solar
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
ID
Baker
Baker
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Ada
15.00
2.75
3.00
3.00
3.00
26.75
20190301 Hydro MC6 Hydro
TotalHydro Projects: 1
OregonSolar PROJECTS ONLINE
2.10
2.10
Project
Number
Facility
Type
ProiectSize
(MW)
CountyStateProject Name
90001412
9000141 1
9000131 1
90000088
90000073
90000001
9000141 6
90001 41 3
90000067
90000084
90000080
90000086
90000063
90000062
90000059
90000055
90000072
90000028
90000079
90000077
90000025
Solar
Solar
Solar
Solar
Solar
Solar
Solar
Solar
Solar
Solar
Solar
Solar
Solar
Solar
Solar
Solar
Solar
Solar
Solar
Solar
Solar
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
0.00
0.0't
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
Sth Ave Pivot OR
6th Ave Rental OR
7 kW Shaffer Solar OR
7.7 kW lrrigation OR
8.64 kW Home OR
Bauer Solar OR
Chamberlain Dairy OR
Chamberlain House OR
Circle M Farms OR
City of Ontario PV Array #2 - WWTP Building OR
City of Ontario PV Array #3 - WWTP Aerators OR
City of Ontario PV Array #4 - WWTP Lift Station OR
City of Ontario PV Array #5 - City Hall OR
City of Ontario PV Array #6 - Public Works Shop OR
City of Ontario PV Array #7 - WTP (East Building) OR
City of Ontario PV Array #8 - WTP (West Ponds) OR
City of Ontario PV Array #9 - Golf Clubhouse OR
Cliff and Pat Looney OR
Dean Mackeyl Main House - PV Array OR
Dean Mackey3 lrrigation Pump - PV Array OR
Findley Land and Livestock, LLC lrrigation OR
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
1-Renewable Energy Project List Page 7
Prnier:lSizrl
ldaho Power Company
Renewable Energy Project List
as of 712412018
For Projects in: ID, MT, OR
OregonSolar PROJ ECTS ONLIN E
Proieci I raiititu lNr6-oo I -T*;
I l-l - I rulu)
Project Name
90000002
90000075
90000081
90000006
90001 302
90000076
90000044
90001 41 7
90001 41 5
90000005
90000003
90000007
90001 306
90001 31 3
90001 31 5
90001414
90001410
90001 31 2
90000051
90000064
90000078
90000057
90000060
90000043
90001 31 0
90000045
90000048
90000047
90000056
90000054
90000050
90000052
OR Solar
OR Solar
OR Solar
OR Solar
OR Solar
OR Solar
OR Solar
OR Solar
OR Solar
OR Solar
OR Solar
OR Solar
OR Solar
OR Solar
OR Solar
OR Solar
OR Solar
OR Solar
OR Solar
OR Solar
OR Solar
OR Solar
OR Solar
OR Solar
OR Solar
OR Solar
OR Solar
OR Solar
OR Solar
OR Solar
OR Solar
OR Solar
Findley Residence
Findley Shop
Findley Well
Gary T. Taylor
Green House
Ham Piv
House
Jackie Hansen
Jake's House
Kennington Dairy Solar
Luther Homestead
Luther Wetlands
Malheur County Fairgrounds #1
Malheur County Fairgrounds #2
Malheur County Fairgrounds #3
Michael McGourty
New House
Onion Storage
Pine Eagle High School PV Array
Pine Eagle Middle School PV Array
Pine Eagle Pump Station PV Array
Pump 1
Pump 12
Pump 15
Pump 16
Pump 17
Pump 19
Pump 2
Pump 20
Pump 3
Pump 4
Pump 9
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.0'1
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Malhuer
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Malhuer
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Baker
Baker
Baker
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
1-Renewable Energy Project List Page 8
ldaho Power Company
Renewable Energy Project List
as of 712412018
For Projects in: lD, MT, OR
OregonSolar PROJECTS ONLINE
Proiect I Fiiiiit, INrfr-oo I -TVD;_
I
T Stare lt-l lF.i""tSiz"
l--lMW)|
-
Project Name Countv
90001307 OR Solar Pump A
90000046 OR Solar Pump B
90000061 OR Solar Roger Findley
90001309 OR Solar Schuster
90001303 OR Solar Scott Piv
90001301 OR Solar Shop
90000004 OR Solar TVCC Livestock Center Solar Project
TotalOR Solar Projects: 60
Non PURPA PROJECTS ONLINE
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
Malhuer
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
Malheur
0.00
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.00
0.01
0.46
Project
Number
Facility
Type
Project$ize
(rvrw)
CountyStateProiect Name
lOOOOOO3 Geotherma Neal Hot Springs Unit #1
10000002 Geotherma Raft River Unit #1
Total Geothermal Projects: 2
10000001 Wind Elkhorn Wind Project
TotalWind Projects: 1
OR Malheur
lD Cassia
OR Union
22.00
13.00
35.00
100.65
100.65
1-Renewable Energy Project List Page 9
BEFORE THE
IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
GASE NO. IPC-E-18-07
IDAHO POWER COMPANY
ATTACHMENT 3
Resource Tvpe Developer Project MW State Term Estimated Obligation
A A1 4.7 ID 20 $21,855.781
B B1 2 OR 20 $4,907,799
Biomass C C1 48 ID 2 $23,436,186
Solar
D D1 80 OR 20*$149,759,594
D2 50 OR 20*$81,902,351
E
E1 18 OR 20*$37,682,058
E2 I OR 20*$19,154,809
E3 I OR 20*$18,436,133
E4 I OR 20*$18,181 ,938
E5 I OR 20*$18,083,795
E6 I OR 20*$18,722,861
F F1 3 OR 20*$6,975,817
G G1 300 ID 2 $39,293,162
H H1 45 OR 20*$90,418,974
H2 45 OR 20"$90,418,974
Wind I t1 500 ID 2 s11.578.279TOTAL: $650,808,512
NoG: 'Contraclterm is 20years, howe\,ertheestimaEd obligation is based on l5years of fi)ed pricing. The remainingf\,e)rears is based on an index
price, which is not included in the estimaEd obligation
Hydro
BEFORE THE
IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
CASE NO. IPC-E-I8-07
IDAHO POWER COMPANY
ATTACHMENT 4
Facility Type Total
January 201 I
thru
December 201 8
ldaho Power Company
PURPA
Contract Obligations
January2019 January2020hru thru
December 20'19 December 2020
JantjE,ry2021
thru
December 2021
Jaill€,ry2022
thru
December 2022
January 2023
thereafter
Solar
Hydro
Biomass
Wnd
CoGen
Thermal
$1,035,723,633
$307,1 99,906
$158,946,762
$1,929,540,300
$4,534,150
$95,356
$28,853,808
$31,920,945
$10,4'10,650
$107,971,800
$3,875,031
$4,1 89
$30,717,202
$31,614,509
$11,612,238
$111,122,772
$659,'r20
$4,188
$33,718,517
$27,912,933
$10,715,41 1
$'t 14,180,448
$0
$4,188
$38,1 72,963
$26,282,993
$9,896,815
$117,358,846
$0
$4,188
$43,520,550
$25,517,323
$10,131,254
$118,493,694
$0
$4,188
$860,740,593
$163,951,204
$106,'180,384
$1,360,4'12,740
$0
$74,415
AllProjects $3,436,040,108 $183,036,432 $185,730,028 $186,531,497 $191,715,805 $197,667,009 $2,491,359,336
BEFORE THE
IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
CASE NO. IPC-E-18-07
IDAHO POWER COMPANY
ATTACHMENT 5
o\oNa
ir,o
E
9
oq
N{g
C)ooo
o\oNo
idoE9
oaoN
bioEo
stooooslo>INNO*OlS
=l -.iddcil.i-l@@@@@l@Cl@oa@olo
@Ot@Fl;i6N6N6IYolN@(o$6lX'9lri d ot d ljl H
EJ8.5. 3. 3. R]IxlFSFoolujl o$o@@l.EEEEEI
IsF@NOltOF@tlEl@t+-OlElssBSal-t-NOONINNNNNI
I
oooooq\qc!qN*tFoOONNroe@@e
ON-@OFO@O\to- o- N- o- o-
NSN*rN@@O@g- r- O- N- O-qNoooONONOggggS
so@ooOrON$N_ V- r- @- @-oo$aooNoooO- N- N- r- !:rNrrN
NO600to$$oo@ooo
@tFFNNN$Oro_ o_ o_ o- o.$o@ooooo$o@_ o_ N_ o- @-oN@@*ooooN@oooo
NOOOOFOFFNN_ t_ o_ @- N-ooo@oN@@roN- @- N- O- $-.FFNF
$@@soOONNNeo6eo
OFOrO$oto@o- @- (O- q F-$@$NOo(o$ooN- O- O- O- O-*otrN0totoooeeo
oNFOO@0ot-S- 6- t'-- O- O_
@SO-ONNNNOO- F- O- N- n_FrNFr
6NOtONNNOO660@O
-O(OOO{NOO@OIN r o N @
:lo N o 6 ohlN N @ @ ollN r N @ @Plo@'jNNrijl@oooo@o@o@
FOOOO@@NNrEl 6 o o F oElpasestro@@oN
@o$$o
LOt6@NO-??--^oooooo>NNNNN
EI
=lEIct
Eoo
oo
tr
ooo
o-tlo-
6a6
ooo
F!tro
ooo
oG(9
E
6z