20210707Reply to Idaho Power Answer.pdf

Peter J. Richardson ISB # 3195
Gregory M. Adams ISB # 7454
RICHARDSON ADAMS, PLLC
515 N. 27'h Street
Boise, Idaho 83702
Telephone : [phone]
Fax: [phone]
tr2c.[c1(4, r i c!i4 LtJ st;trar.rqlq l r]ii!y-q!t!tl
gre g(rg1 ri c h arcl.sona ndo Iearv, co nr
' ':' :''' -, PH 3: l0
Attomeys for the Industrial Customers of ldaho Power
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF THE INDUSTRIAL
CUSTOMERS OF IDAHO POWER'S PETITION
FOR AN ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
CASE NO.IPC.E.2T-I9
THE INDUSTRIAL CUSTOMERS OF IDAHO
POWER - REPLY TO TDAHO POWER'S
ANSWER
COMES NOW, the Industrial Customers of ldaho Power ("lClP") and hereby lodges its
Reply to Idaho Power Company's ("ldaho Power" or "Company) Answer conceming the
Company's apparent failure to comply with the ldaho Public Utility Commission's
("Commission") competitive procurement requirements.l ldaho Power's Answer has not
mitigated the legitimate concerns raised by the ICIP, to wit: the Company appears to be, in fact,
seeking to acquire new resources in violation of this Commission's competitive procurement
I ldaho Power conectly noted that the lClP's Petition initiating this mater incorrectly stated that it was filed under
Idaho Rule of Civil Procedure 33: the lClP's petition was actually filed pursuant to Rule 33 of the ldaho Public
Utility Commission's Rules of Procedure. The ICIP apologies for any confusion caused by this typographical error
ICIP Reply to ldaho Power's Answer
Docket No. IPC-E-21-19
Page I
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
requirements which require competitive bidding for new resources that exceed an 80 MW
threshold.2
In its Answer at page 3, Idaho Power Company ("ldaho Power") clarified that:
The NOI [Notice of Intent All-Source Request for Proposals] states, "The need for
additional capacity resources has been identified as early as Summer 2023 at
approximately 80 MW, with peak deficits that grow to approximately 400 MW by
Summer 2025." NOI, p. l. The 2021 RFP seeks proposals to acquire up to 80 MW of
capacity to be online by Summer 2023.
IEmphasis provided.]
In Section 3 of the Utility's Request for Proposals ("RFP"), attached as Attachment I to its
answer, Idaho Power identifies the following five "Key Product Specifications:"
l. Energy Storage Project
2. Solar PV plus Storage Project
3. Wind plus Storage Project
4. Energy Storage Component of a Solar PV plus Storage Project
5. Energy Storage Component of a Wind plus Storage Project
Energy and/or capacity that are not from a specific source (e.g. a system sale) are not eligible to
bid into ldaho Power's RFP.3 In addition, projects not already in Idaho Power's transmission
queue will likely not have sufficient time to be considered in the RFP.a Thus, Idaho Power has
effectively limited the universe of potential projects to just storage and various combinations of
wind and solar with storage. As of this writing, there appears to be no stand-alone storage
2 See Section 860-089-0 100(c) of the Oregon competitive procurement rules, attached as Exhibit No. I to the ICIP's
Petition for an Order to Show Cause. And see, Idaho PUC Order No. 32745 which adopts the Oregon competitive
procurement requirements.I See Section 3.2 of the RFP.
a See Section 4.1 of the RFP.
ICIP Reply to ldaho Power's Answer
Docket No. IPC-E-}|-19
Page 2
projects in ldaho Power's interconnection queue and the only pumped storage project in the
queue is identified as "pump storage, wind, solar."S It is physically impossible to have an
electrical storage generating system that is capable of delivering 80 MW of capacitylenergy
without having an additional source of energy with which to charge the storage system. Thus, if
Idaho Power's RFP is to be taken at face value, successful bidders with an energy storage project
will have to couple their 80 MW energy storage system with additional energy resources in order
to charge the storage system (e.g. a battery, or a kinetic energy storage system such as pumped
hydro). If the energy resources providing input to the storage system utilize electrical energy,
then the 80 MW storage system is, in fact larger than just 80 MW. tf this is the case, then Idaho
Power is seeking new resources6 in excess of 80 MW and the Oregon competitive bidding
requirements apply. If, on the other hand, the 80 MW storage system is charged with something
other than electrical energyT then Idaho Power will have complied with the 80 MW threshold
requirement of the Oregon competitive procurement rules.
The Oregon Commission's order adopting its competitive bidding rules specifically
address the concept ofaggregating generating resources:
We also note that the adopted rules are applicable to aggrc$ate acquisitions that are equal
to or greater than 80 MW. not iust sinele resources of 80 MW or greater. This language
is intended to capture acquisitions that have a large system impact, but are accomplished
on a smaller individual or distributed scale...
We also eliminate the previous references to a separate storage threshold.
Oregon PUC Docket No. AR 600, Order No. l8-324 at p. 5, Aug. 30, 2018, emphasis provided.
5 ldaho Power Cenerator Queue No. 530.
6 Only unique specific resources may be acquired under the RFP which prohibits using existing system resources -
for instance economy purchases during off-peak times from ldaho Power itself to charge the battery system are not
eligible.
7 For example, a natural gas or diesel fueled pump in a pumped storage hydroelectric system.
ICIP Reply to Idaho Power's Answer
Docket No. IPC-E-21-19
Page 3
Thus, if a battery storage system with an output rating of 80 MW is coupled with any other
electrical generator for charging the battery, then for purposes of the Oregon competitive bidding
rules, the project is larger than 80 MW.
Idaho Power's Answer seeking dismissal of the ICIP's Petition for an Order to Show
cause is premature pending resolution of the uncertainties as to the size and configuration of the
type of project the Company is seeking. For instance, if the Company intends to limit its
acquisition of new resources to 80 MW (e.g. a 40 MW battery coupled with a 40 solar anay) the
ICIP will withdraw its Petition. Of course, such a configuration would fail to meet the
Company's stated need of 80 MW of new capacity by 2023. If, on the other hand, the Company
is seeking an 80 MW storage resource that is charged with any electric resource (e.g. wind or
solar input of any size), then the Oregon competitive procurement rules must be adhered to
pursuant to this Commission's decision in Order No. 32745.
WHEREFORE, the lndustrial Customers of Idaho Power respectfully requests the
Commission deny ldaho Power's Answer seeking dismissal of its Petition for an Order to Show
Cause. The Commission should require Idaho Power to either affrrmatively show that it intends
to fully comply with the Oregon competitive bidding requirements or that such requirements are
not applicable to its currently pending RFP.
Dated: July 7,2021
By
PeterJ. Richardson, RICHARDSON ADAMS, PLLC
Attorneys for the [ndustrial Customers of ldaho Power
ICIP Reply to ldaho Power's Answer
Docket No. IPC-E-21-19
Page 4
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on the 7th day of July 2021, a tnre and correct copy of the within and
foregoing Industrial Customets of ldatro Power Reply to Idaho Power's Answer in Case No.
IPC-E-21-19 by electronic copy only, to:
Donovan Walker, Senior Counsel
Idaho PowerCompany
dwa -lkgr@ i dahopo we r. c ogt
doi kq t{@ i ds h qJ,o-ws r. !^-o rr
Jan Noriyuki
Commission Secretary
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
J a_l. nqr! LUki i3ptt_c, i da ltq. gov.
r
By:
J. Richardson
ICIP Reply to ldaho Power's Answer
Docket No. IPC-E-21-19
Page 5
Matt Hunter
Deputy Attomey General
Idatro Public Utilities Commission
r[4.[!. h!trlLg!'@puq.t.d8]r.9,gQ t