20210121Lynch Supplemental Declaration.pdf

Peter J. Richardson ISB No. 3195
Cregory M. Adams ISB No. 7454
Richardson Adams, PLLC
515 N. 27th Street
Boise, Idaho 83702
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
pe te r,fg| 5i c h4 r{songd ams. c o nr
grcgfqri c h ardsonadanr s.conr
Attorneys for the Black Mesa Energy, LLC
BETORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
, . 1,1t.. i: iV i:i;
',,,.:-,ii iHg,Ls
,,.':'- l.;:;ti-::-;
,- ,. ,_,_.r.,irr,i;i: li;',
BLACK MESA ENERGY, LLC
Complainant,
Vs.
IDAHO POWER COMPANY,
Defendant.
CASE NO. IPC-8.20.17
SUPPLEMENTAL DECI,ARATION
OF BRIAN LYNCH IN SUPPORT OF
BLACK MESA ENERCY, LLC'S
MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
I, Brian Lynch, declare under the penalty of perjury as follows:
l. This supplemental declaration is based on my personal knowledge and, if called
to testify to the following facts, I could and would competently do so.
2. I submit this supplemental declaration in support of Black Mesa Energy, LLC's
("Black Mesa") Motion for Summary Judgement before the ldaho Public Utilities Commission
("Commission") requesting that the Commission find that Black Mesa has formed two legally
enforceable obligations committing ldaho Power Company ("ldaho Power") to purchase the net
output of the Black Mesa Energy I storage qualifying facility and the Black Mesa Energy 2
energy storage qualifying facility as more fully explained in its Motion for Summary Judgment
fited in this docket.
SUPPLMENTAL DECLARATION OF BRIAN LYNCH IN SUPPORT OF BLACK MESA'S
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDCMENT
IPC-E-20-17 -- PACE l
3. I incorporate herein by reference all of the factualassertions mads in my original
declaration dated as of December 11,2020,
4. ln its brief in this matter ("Commission Brief') the Staffof the tdaho Public
Utilities Commission ("Staff') stated that:
ln summary, the Company did not provide an indicative pricing proposal. Instead, Idaho
Power alleged deficiencies and petitioned the Commission to prospectively establish an
energy storage category of QFs within ldaho's implementation of PURPA. Black Mesa
responded to the deficiencies (the contents ofthe response not appearing on the record at
this time), but didn't subsequently receive confirmation from the company that the
defi c ienc ies were addressed.
Commission Stafls Brief at p. 13.
5. Attached hereto is a true and correct copy of Black Mesa's response referenced by
the Commission Staffwhich is dated February 4,2020 and which was emailed to ldaho Power
on that date. Also attached is a true and correct copy of the transmittal email that accompanied
the February 4,2020, response referenced in the Staff s Brief.
6. Idaho Power has never responded to Black Mesa's correction to ldaho Power's
assertion that there was an alleged deficiency in its Schedule 73 Applications.
I declare undcr penalty ofperjury pursuant to the law ofthe State of ldaho that the
foregoing is true and correct.
DATED this 20 day of January 2021.
Bv:Brian Lynch
RICHARDSON ADAMS, PLLC
SUPPLMENTAL DECLARA'TION OF BRIAN LYNCH IN SUPPORT OF BLACK MESA'S
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDCMENT
IPC-E.2o.I7 -- PAGE2
Peter J. Richardson (lSB No. 3195)
Gregory M. Adams (lSB No. 7454)
Richardson Adams, PLLC
515 N.27th Street
Boise, Idaho 83702
Telephone: [phone]
peter@ richardsonadam s.com
greg@ric hardonadams.com
Attomeys for Complainant Black Mesa Energy, LLC
BEFORE THE
IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
BLACK MESA ENERGY, LLC,
Complainant,
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. IPC-E-20-17
vs.SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION
OF BRIAN LYNCH TN SUPPORT OF
BLACK MESA ENERCY, LLC'S
MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDCMENT
IDAHO POWER COMPANY,
Defendant.
EXHIBIT I
Subject: Re: Black Mesa
Date: Wednesday, February 5, 2020 at8;25:22 AM Mountain Standard Time
From: Brian Lynch
To: Darrington, Michael
CC: Walker, Donovan, Polito, Michael, Wilson, Toby, Matt Garlinghouse
Attachments: Sched ule 73 Response 2.5.20. pdf, image001.jpg
Michael-
Attached please find our response to your letter.
Brian
From: "Darrington, Michael" <[e-mail]>
Date: Monday, February 3,2O2O at 7:44 AM
To: Brian Lynch <blynch@ redwoodenergy.com>
Cc: "Walker, Donovan" <[e-mail]>, "Polito, Michael" <[e-mail]>,
"Wilson, Toby" <TWilson @ idahopower.com>
Subject: RE: Black Mesa
Brian,
Please see ldaho Powert letter, attached to this email, in response to your Schedule 73 Applications and your
letter received on January 27,2020.
ful rcfiot*: i Dl.l rringti:a
ldaho Power I Power Supply
tllrrrlr 208-388-5946
F.yl a r l, I l,,ir!{i Ln gtg_ll i f l !J i.:{i t,-l p_e\ye_r.ip ril
From: Brian Lynch <[e-mail]>
Sent: Monday, January 27,2020 5:11AM
To: Energy Contracts <[e-mail]>
Cc: Darington, [e-mail]>; Walker, Donovan <[e-mail]>
Subject IEXTERNAL] Black Mesa
KEEP IDAHO POWER SECUREI External emails may request information or contain malicious links or
attachments. Verify the sender before proceeding, and check for additional warning messages below.
Page 1 of 2
Wednesda9 lanuary 20,2O2l at 11:O3:21 Mountain Standard Time
Please see the attached.
Brian Lynch
Managing Principal
urvlsn6'sa*s$dnetsv,c;
310,750.7796
IDAHO POWER LEGAT DISCTAIMER
This transmission may contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or exernpt from
disclosure under applicable law. lf you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein (including
any reliance thereon) is STRICTIY PROHIBITED. tf you received this transmission in error, please
immediately contact the sender and destroy the material in its entirety, whether in electronic or
hard copy format. Thank you.
?ate2ol2
BLACK MESA ENERCY, LLC
MB MEZZDEV, I,I-C
PO BOX 273 t
PAI,OS VERDES, CA90274
b Iy Ir; I r.lr. i',:,J i.vugtl:rtrtlg\, corn
February 4,2020
Re Black Mesa Energy l, LLC
Black Mesa Energy, 2,LLC
Frederic Energy, l, LLC
Frederic Energy 2, LLC
Michael Darrington:
This is in response to your letter of February 3,2A20, in which you state that the
Schedule 73 Applications for the above referenced QFs are deficient.
As you know, Idaho Power is obligated, pursuant to Schedule 73, to provide indicative
pricing and proposed contract terms and conditions within ten business days from the date on
which the QF has provided all of the information requested in section I .a ofl Schedule 73.
Conversely, if ldaho Power determines that the QF has not "provided sufficient information as
required in Section I .a," then the Company is obligated to provide written notice of said
deficiency - also within a ten-business day timeframe.
According to your letter, the above referenced QFs submitted "deficient" Schedule 73
requests. The first paragraph in your letter under the heading "Applications' Deficiency"
concluded with this sentence: "The schedule of estimated deliveries provided with your
application appear to have the same output shape as that of a solar project." Although your
observation in this regard may be accurate, it does not allege (nor even infer) a deficiency.
Therefore, we have no choice but to treat this observation for what it is, a mere observation and
not an assertion of a deficiency.
The second (and only other) paragraph under the heading of "Applications' Deficiency" points
out several minor discrepancies between the output spreadsheet provided to ldaho Power
pursuant to Schedule 73 and the output described in the projects' Form 556. You conclude this
second paragraph with the request that the projects "provide an hourly generation profile
consistent with the capability of your proposed battery storage facility that represents the
generation output you intend to deliver." Your request suggests that you have rejected (or at
best, ignored) our submission of the 8,760 hourly spreadsheets submitted with our Schedule 73
applications. Those spreadsheets do contain our "hourly generation profiles that are consistent
with the capability of our proposed battery storage facilities that we intend to deliver."l Your
I lt may be helpful for ldaho Power to understand that Schedule 73 only requests an "estimate" of the hourly output,
and that FERC Form 556 only rcquests a "nominal" description of the electrical output of the proposed facility.
classification of our estimated hourly deliveries as a deficiency in the Schedule 73 Applications
is therefore m isplaced.
Because you have not, in fact, even alleged a deficiency in our Schedule 73 Applications,
we expect the Company to promptly acknowledge its intent to comply with the letter, as well as
the intent, of Schedule 73 and to tender terms, conditions and rates for our four proposed
contracts within fiye business days from today.
Your letter also discusses various court orders and alleged legal precedents that appear to
be well beyond the immediate scope of our interaction with ldaho Power - which of course has
to do with the Company's failure to comply with its Schedule 73 requirement to tender terms,
conditions and contract rates within ten business days of receipt of our competed application.
With regard to these other issues you raise, we are confident the ldaho PUC will abide by both
its federal and state legal obligations with respect to its duties under PURPA.
Sincerely,
rian Lynch
Managing Member
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on the 2lst of January 202l,atrue and correct oopy of the
within and foregoing SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION OF BRIAN LYNCH in DocketNo.
IPC-E-20-17 was served, pursuant to Commission Order No.34602, exclusively via electronic
mailto:
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
Jan Noriyuki, Secretary
Eward J. Jewell, Deputy Attomey General
i an.noriy uki(}prBidabo.gqy
E"_ dwgrd j eJe I I @pqc. i daho.gAy
Idaho Power Company
Donovan Walker, Lead Counsel, Idaho Power Company
d walks*0 rdqhopp w cr.co m
r!eg.kct{a}idatlell-plugl:eem
b
I
RICHARDSON ADAMS. PLLC
SUPPLMENTAL DECLARATION OF BRIAN LYNCH IN SUPPORT OF BLACK MESA'S
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
IPC.E.2O.I7 .. PAGE I