20220818Comments.pdf

Emma E. Sperry (IN Bar No. 37224-84)
710 N 6th Street
Boise,ID 83701
(208) s37-7993 x230
esperry@i dahoconservation. org
Attorney for the Idaho Conservation League
BEFORE THE IDAHO PTJBLIC IJTILITIES COMMISSION
. '.:". i. /
IN THE MATTER OF IDAIIO )
POWER COMPAI\IY'S )
APPLICATION FOR A )
CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC )
COI{VEMENCE AND I\ECESSITY )
TO ACQUTRE RESOTJRCES TO BE )
oNLINE BY 2023 TO SECIIRE )
ADEQUATE AND RELIABLE )
SERVTCE TO rrs CUSTOMERS )
IPC-E-22-13
ICL COMMENT
CASE NO. IPC-E.22-I3
IDAHO CONSERVATION LEAGIIE
COMMENT
The Idaho Conservation League (ICL) submits the following formal comments regarding
Idaho Power's application for a certificate of public convenience and necessity (CPCN) to obtain
new storage resources. ICL is excited to see ldaho Power invest more in renewables and storage,
but we are concerned that Idaho Power is over-eager to fill capacitydeficitswith Company-
owned resources and is thus ignoring the potential of third-party ownership, including customer-
owned generation, to provide needed capacity. We ask that the Commission reject Idaho Power's
application until the utility can show that: I ) It considered non-utility owned resources during the
bidding process for this resource, and 2) It has done a full analysis of the potential for customer
generationto fulfiII at least part of the current capacity deficits.
I
August 18th,2022
I. Idaho Power Unreasonably Ignored all Non-Utility-OwnedResources in its
Resource Procurement Process.
Idaho Power's procurement process required bidders to include a build-transfer
agreement (BTA), potentially excluding bids that may have been less costly and more beneficial
for customers. I Idaho Power, like all regulated utilities, earns profit by building and owning
infrastructure. Idaho Power's requirement that new resources include a BTA which will transfer
ownership back to the utility is neither "fair" nor "competitive," but rather is rooted in profit-
seeking motives.2 As a result of Idaho Power's narrow procurement process which prevented
third-party ownership, customers and stakeholders have no idea whether the utility's selected bid
is the "least-cost, least risk procurement" or whether a developer who did not wish to offer a
BTA could have provided a better deal to the utility and its customers.3 Indeed, Idaho Power all
but admits that the present procurement process does not necessarily serve the public interest.a
In its Application, the utilityprovides a multitude of reasons for why it required a BTA in
bids for this resource, but it presents littlejustification for these reasons. Regulated utilities
across the country frequently engage in PPAs. All of the risks that Idaho Power described in its
Applicationand testimonycan be dealt with in contract, a fact noted by the utilityitself.5 In fact,
the Oregon Public Utilities Commission recently approved Pacifi Corp' s sample tol ling
I Ap p I i c a t io n, Case No. PC-E-22 - 13, 9 (Apr. 29, 2022).
2 ApplicationatS.
3 Id.
4 DirectTestimonyofTimotlryTatun,CaseNo.IPC-E-22-13,18(Apr.29,2022)("Goingforward,theCompany
recognizesthatacompetitive procurementprocessthat appropriatelyconsidersthefullrangeofcosbandbenefits
of differing ownership structura may ultimately best sertte the public interest" (emphasis added)).
5 Application at l0 ("[T]hese issues could conceivably be addressed through an agreement with a third-party
provide/').
2
IPC-E-22-t3
ICL COMMENT August 18th,2022
agreement for third-party ownership of storage resources.6 Idaho Power could have used this
agreement as a model to create its own contracts for PPAs.
Idaho Power's main justificationforits inabilityto contractwith a third-partyowner is
the exigency created by the capacity deficit, but it is unclear why ldaho Power could not have
taken earlier steps to mitigate this risk. Parties and stakeholders have been urging Idaho Power to
develop competitiveprocurementprocessesfor years.T Idaho Power could have spent any of the
last decade working with stakeholders to develop new procurement protocols, especially as it
became increasingly clear that the utility would lose capacity at Bridger and have increased
demand due to populationgrowth. Instead, the utility continues to push the proverbial can down
the road in a less than subtle attempt to ensure that it does not have to engage in competitive
procurement processes.
ICL fears that granting ldaho Power this CPCN without requiring it to engage in a full
and unbiased bidding process will set additional precedent for the utility to continue to use unfair
procurementprocesses and avoid all third-partyownership of utilityresources. Although Idaho
Power claimsthat it is "commiuedto working with Commission Staff and other interested
parties to explore competitive procurement practices that result in a comprehensive and fair
evaluation of price and non-price attributes of various resource ownership structures," this
commitment is not a guarantee, and Idaho Power has repeatedly shown itselfto be hostile to any
6 Oregon Public ServiceCommission, Order No. 22-130,C-,aseNo. UM 2193,
https : //apps.puc.state.or.us/orrders/202 2ords D2- l30.pdf
7 Renewed Motion to Stay of thelndustrial Customers ofldaho Power,Irc-E-09-03,6 (July 31,2009),
https://puc.idaho.sov/Fileroom/PublicFileJELEC/IPC/IPCE0903/lntervenor/IClP/2009073lJoint%20Renewed%20
Motion%20toolo20Stav.pdf (stating that "granting a CPCN to a company-owned resource chosen from the
Company's very flawed request for proposals (RFP) process wil send a negative sigrral to the development
community, to wit: Idaho is not a place where independent energy providers should put their time and effort").
J
IPC-E-22-13
ICL COMMENT August 18th,2022
non-utilityownership structures.8 This hostilityleads ICL to believe that the utilitywill continue
to evade true competitive procurement processes. Further, fair procurement processes that select
the most cost-effective and reliable resources are not an elective program that Idaho Power may
choose to "explore," but rather an obligationembedded in the utility's duty to provide'Just and
reasonable" service.e ICL asks that the Commissionhold Idaho Power accountable and requireit
to engage in a fairprocurementprocess for the 120 MW of storage so that Idaho Power cannot
rely on this decision in the future as justificationto use biased bidding processes once again.
II. Idaho Power's Procurement Process Unreasonably Ignored Customer-Owned
Generation as a Potential Resource to Meet the2023 Capacity Deficit.
In determining which resource would best meet the2023 capacity deficit, Idaho Power
assessed utility-owned peak capacity resources, demand response programs, pricing programs,
and short-term market solutions, but failed to consider customer-owned generation.l0 Customer-
owned generation has been shown to provide capacity and reliabilitybenefits to utilities, not to
mention a multitude of rate-based and non-rate-based benefi ts to customers. I I
Idaho Power likely assumed that because customer generation accounts for a tiny
percentage of the utility's generationcapacity, this resource could not meet the utility's short-
term capacity needs, and it was thus not worthwhile to examine its potential to fill future
I Application at 3 (stating that "there is benefit to both the Company and its customers when resource acquisitions,
particularly dispatchable resources, are Company{wne d as ldaho Power must mainain its financial health to rennin
a viable, going-concem, regulated entity'' even though the utility is statutorily guaranteed to make back any and all
of its costs with orwithoututilityownership ofgenerationresources); See also Application,IPC-E-2141,5 (Dec.3,
202 I ) (withdrawn by Idaho Power Company) (Idaho Power asked forrelief from the Oregon re source procurernent
rules in order to meet identified capacity deficits in 2023,2024,and2025, providinga strong implicationthatthe
utility has little inteirtion of engaging in fair and competitive procuremeirt prccesses for capacity deficits even
beyondthe 2023 deficit identified in the ongoing storage CPCNproceeding.)
e Idaho Code $ 6l-302.
r0 Direct Testimony of Jared Ellsworfrr, IPC -E-22-13,17-l 8 (Apr. 29,2022).
| | S e e Co mme nt s of th e ldoho Co ns er-vat i on Lea gue, IPC-E-2 I 4 0 (Ma y I 2, 2022).
4
IPC-E-22-T3
ICL COMMENT August 18th,2022
capacity. Of course, ICL agrees that it is highly improbable that customers would acquire 120
MW of generation in time to fill the2023 capacity deficit. However, Idaho Power's refusal to
even analyze the potential of this resourcemeans that customer generationwill never appear
valuable to the utility, and the resource will be unable to grow. For example, the utility's use of
expanded demand response programs and new solar/storage resources to fill the near-term
capacity defrcit likely reduced the value of the avoided generation capacity cost in Idaho Power's
VODER Study which will lower the overall suggested export creditrate (ECR) in the Study. A
lower ECR means that fewer people will be able to afford rooftop or community solar, and this
resource will continue to be underutilizedin Idaho.
ICL requests that the Commissionrequire the utilityto at least analyzethe potential of
new customer generation, includingcommunity-basedcustomergeneratioru for both solar and
storage. ICL also requests that the utility include more robust analyses of the potential of
customer generation to fulfill future capacity needs.
Respectfu lly submitted this I 8th day of Augu st, 2022.
/s/ Emma E. Sperry
EmmaE. Sperry
Attorney for the Idaho Conservation League
5
wc-E-22-13
ICL COMMENT August 18th,2022
CERTIT'ICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certiffthat on this l8th day of August, 2022,I deliveredtrue and correct copies
of the foregoing COMMENT to the following persons via the method of service noted:
/s/ Emma E. Sperry
EmmaE. Sperry
Electronicmail onlv (See Order 35058):
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
RileyNewton
Dayn Hardie
riley.newton@Fuc. idaho. sov
da]rn.hardie@ouc. idaho. gov
[e-mail]. gov
Idaho Power
Donovan E. Walker
Timothy E. Tatum
dwalker@i dahopower.com
ttatum@i dahopower. com
dockets@i dalropower.com
IdaHydro
C. Tom Arkoosh
Amber Dresslar
tom. arkoosh@arkoosh. com
amber. dresslar@arkoosh. com
erin.cecil@arkoosh. com
Micron Technologt, Inc.
AustinRueschhoff
ThorvaldA. Nelson
AustinW. Jensen
Jim Swier
darueschhoff@hollandhart. com
tnelson@holl andhart. com
awj ensen@hollandhart. com
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
IPC-E-22-t3
ICL COMMENT
Industrial Customers of ldaho Power
PeterJ. Richardson
Don Reading
Peter@richardsonadrrrt..o*
dreading@mindsprins. com
6
August l8th,2022