HomeMy WebLinkAbout20060308Idaho Power.pdfIDAHO POWER COMPANY
O. BOX 70
BOISE, IDAHO 83707
, i
An IDACORP Company
' ,," "
.. i. t; "'" 'J
BARTON L. KLINE
Senior Attorney
i):
,.. ....'
March 7 2006 'flU! i:
~~,
C:('
" -
;S~~\U,
Jean D. Jewell , Secretary
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
472 West Washington Street
P. O. Box 83720
Boise, Idaho 83720-0074
Re:Case No. PAC-O5-
Comments of Idaho Power Company
Dear Ms. Jewell:
, Please find enclosed for filing an original and seven (7) copies of Idaho
Power Company s Comments regarding the above-described case.
I would appreciate it if you would return a stamped copy of this transmittal
letter in the enclosed self-addressed , stamped envelope.
Barton L. Kline
BLK:jb
Enclosures
Telephone (208) 388-2682 Fax (208) 388-6936 E-mail BKline€Yidahopower.com
, i
BARTON L. KLINE, ISB # 1526
MONICA B. MOEN , ISB # 5734
Idaho Power Company
1221 West Idaho Street
P. O. Box 70
Boise, Idaho 83707
Telephone: (208) 388-2682
FAX Telephone: (208) 388-6936
BKline ~ idahopower.com
MMoen ~ idahopower.com
Attorneys for Idaho Power Company
:;"";j
I:: (j:C;l\
.. i'
..', '
j i iL!! \L~j CU;,\S~!iC);:
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION
OF PACIFICORP FOR APPROVAL OF A
POWER PURCHASE AGREEMENT FOR
THE SALE AND PURCHASE OF ELECTRIC
ENERGY BETWEEN PACIFICORP AND
SCHWENDIMAN WIND LLC
CASE NO. PAC-05-
COMMENTS OF IDAHO POWER
COMPANY
These comments are made in response to the Commission s February 8
2006 Notice of Joint Motion For Approval of Amended Power Purchase Agreement and
Notice of Comment Deadline.
Having reviewed the Amended Power Purchase Agreement
Schwendiman Agreement") dated January 27 2006, under which Schwendiman Wind
LLC ("Schwendiman ) proposes to sell electric energy generated by the Schwendiman
Wind Facility to PacifiCorp, Idaho Power believes that it is appropriate to present these
comments to the Commission for its consideration.
COMMENTS OF IDAHO POWER COMPANY, Page
Summary of Comments.
(a)Based on historical data, it appears that the procedure for
computing liquidated damages contained in the Schwendiman Agreement has a greater
tendency to shift the cost of OF non-performance away from OF developers and onto
utility customers than does the liquidated damages provision contained in the multiple
OF contracts the Commission has approved for Idaho Power.
(b)Idaho Power recognizes that, for numerous reasons
including promoting uniformity between the multiple jurisdictions in which PacifiCorp
operates, PacifiCorp may prefer to structure its OF contracts and the liquidated
damages provision in the way that it has in the Schwendiman Agreement. Idaho Power
does not object to PacifiCorp seeking approval for a OF contract that includes terms
and conditions that are different than those the Commission has approved for Idaho
wet OF COlitl acts so fang as Idaho Puwer i~ nut requirecltu inducle the SGhwenclilllan
terms and conditions in existing or future Idaho Power OF contracts.
Reason for Idaho Power Filinq. Idaho Power acknowledges that it
is unusual for one utility to file comments directed toward a OF contract signed by
another utility and submitted to the Commission for approval. Idaho Power s motivation
for providing these comments arises out of the fact that some OF developers have
indicated to the Company that they prefer portions of the Schwendiman Agreement
particularly the liquidated damages computation provision in the Schwendiman
Agreement, over the equivalent provisions in the OF contracts the Commission has
approved for Idaho Power. They have further indicated that, if the Commission
determines that the terms and conditions contained in the Schwendiman Agreement are
reasonable, then they believe they would be entitled to include the same terms and
COMMENTS OF IDAHO POWER COMPANY, Page 2
conditions the Commission accepted in Schwendiman in existing and future contracts
with Idaho Power. As will be discussed in greater detail in these comments, while Idaho
Power believes that its liquidated damages provision and its 90%/110% performance
band are somewhat more rigorous than the equivalent provisions in the Schwendiman
Agreement , PacifiCorp s desire to receive approval for the Schwendiman Agreement is
reasonable so long as Idaho Power is not required to modify its existing or future OF
contracts to include the Schwendiman approach.
Specific Contract Provisions
(a)Capacity Factor Commitment vs. Enerqy Amount
Commitment.There are a number of differences between the OF contract provisions
presented by PacifiCorp in the Schwendiman Agreement and the provisions Idaho
Power has included in the OF contracts the Commission has approved for Idaho Power.
Most are not material and are consistent with PacifiCorp s intent to maintain uniformity
in its contracting processes between its several jurisdictions. For example , the
Schwendiman Agreement requires the OF to commit to a particular monthly capacity
factor rather than the monthly energy delivery commitment Idaho Power has included in
its approved contracts. Idaho Power s analysis indicates that, in using the capacity
factor approach , PacifiCorp ultimately comes up with a monthly energy amount and , as
a result, there is no substantive difference between PacifiCorp s approach and Idaho
Power s. There are other differences between the Schwendiman Agreement and the
OF contracts the Commission has approved for Idaho Power, but they are minor and
will not be addressed in these comments.
(b)Generation Outside the 90%/110% Performance Band. One
principal difference between the Schwendiman Agreement and the approach Idaho
COMMENTS OF IDAHO POWER COMPANY, Page 3
Power takes in its Commission-approved OF contracts arises out of how liquidated
damages are determined if a OF generates outside the 90%/110% performance band.
This is the one area where Idaho Power believes that the Schwendiman Agreement
may not be quite as "rigorous" as Idaho Power s approved OF contracts.
In Idaho Power s approved OF contracts, if the OF generates outside the
90%/110% performance band , liquidated damages are computed using energy
purchase prices determined in the same manner as non-firm energy purchase prices
are determined under Idaho Power s Commission-approved Schedule 86 Coqeneration
and Small Power Production, Non-Firm Enerqy. Idaho Power s Schedule 86 non-firm
energy prices are set at 85% of the monthly weighted average of non-firm Mid-C index
prices. In Idaho Power s approved OF contracts , the amounts paid for over-deliveries
(above 110%) cannot exceed the contract price.
Under the Schwendiman Agreement, if the OF fails to deliver within the
90%/110% performance band, it is paid the energy component of the contract price but
is not paid the capacity component. This payment structure sets liquidated damages at
a fixed price for all deliveries outside the 90%/110% performance band. This fixed price
is equal to about 80% of the contract price. Market price is not a consideration in
assessing liquidated damages in the Schwendiman Agreement.
Using this fixed price structure as the measure of liquidated damages , in
months when market prices are less than the fixed price, PacifiCorp customers will pay
more than they would have paid under the market-based performance band included in
the Idaho Power OF contracts. When market prices are lower than the fixed price, the
Schwendiman approach will shift the cost of non-performance from the OF to
PacifiCorp s customers when Idaho Power s liquidated damages provisions would not.
COMMENTS OF IDAHO POWER COMPANY, Page 4
Historically, Idaho Power s Schedule 86 prices have been lower than 80% of OF
contract prices. (See Attachment 1).
Conversely, when market prices are higher than PacifiCorp s fixed price
liquidated damage amount , the Schwendiman liquidated damages provisions would
result in customers paying less than they would have under Idaho Power s procedure.
However, it is Idaho Power s position that , in those circumstances, using market prices
is still preferable because Idaho Power is not exposed to a replacement cost risk and
should be able to resell the OF's over-deliveries at Schedule 86 prices (85% of market).
Under the higher market price conditions, under Idaho Power s approach, OFs will be
benefited and customers will not be disadvantaged because the purchase prices are
capped at the contract price.
To assist the Commission in analyzing this issue, Attachment 1 to these
comments shows a comparison of the two liquidated damages approaches using 2003-
2005 actual data.
Certainly Idaho Power can understand why OF developers would prefer a
fixed price that limits their exposure when market prices are lower than OF contract
prices. Under the Schwendiman price floor concept , when market prices are lower
price risk tends to shift from the OF developer to utility customers. As a result, OFs can
adjust their monthly energy delivery commitment amounts in the agreements upward
within the 90%/110% performance band with less financial risk, but also with less
incentive to set the performance commitment as accurately as possible. Again, this
approach subtly shifts risk from the OFs to customers.
Uniformity Between Jurisdictions Is A Leqitimate Consideration
Idaho Power recognizes that PacifiCorp operates in several jurisdictions and desires to
COMMENTS OF IDAHO POWER COMPANY, Page 5
utilize a pricing structure for liquidated damages in its OF contracts that provide state-to-
state uniformity. In addition, PacifiCorp does not have a filed non-firm purchase tariff
like Idaho Power s Schedule 86.
Procedural Matters. Idaho Power has no objection to the
Commission s determination to utilize modified procedure to process this case and
Idaho Power is not requesting a hearing be held on the Joint Motion of PacifiCorp and
Schwendiman for approval of the Amended Power Purchase Agreement.
Conclusion
For all of these reasons, if the Commission decides to approve the
Schwendiman Agreement, Idaho Power requests that the Commission include language
in the order recognizing that the Schwendiman Agreement is not precedential and that
other Idaho utilities are not obligated to include the same rates , terms and conditions
including the performance and pricing mechanisms contained in the Schwendiman
Agreement in their OF contracts. In particular, Idaho Power requests that the
Commission confirm that the 90%/110% performance band and liquidated damages
provisions for generation outside that band that the Commission has approved in
multiple Idaho Power OF contracts is fair, just and reasonable, and Idaho Power can
continue to utilize that pricing arrangement in its contracts with OF developers seeking
to sell OF power to Idaho Power.
DATED: This 7th day of March, 2006.
BARTO L. KLINE
Attorney for Idaho Power Company
COMMENTS OF IDAHO POWER COMPANY, Page 6
$5
,
00
0
,
00
0
50
0
00
0
00
0
,
00
0
..
.
$
3
,
50
0
00
0
'
0
$
3
,
00
0
,
00
0
::
$
2
50
0
,
00
0
t:
$
2
00
0
,
00
0
c:
c
50
0
00
0
00
0
00
0
$5
0
0
,
00
0
Co
n
t
r
a
c
t
C
o
m
p
a
r
i
s
o
n
-
u
s
i
n
g
2
0
0
5
IP
C
o
N
o
n
l
e
v
e
l
i
z
e
d
P
r
i
c
i
n
g
Pa
c
i
f
i
C
o
r
p
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
~
~
~
~
~
~
~v
Le
v
e
l
o
f
P
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e
::
J
(J
)
""
'
O
;
x
:
.
=
Q)
:
:
;
0
.
.
(Q
Q
)
Q
)
CD
(
)
:
:
:
r
..
.
.
.
:
:
:
r
0
3"
"
'
0
--
0
,
C
D
0
..
.
.
.
3
.
~
N.
.
.
.
.
~
0
Z
a
UJ
;
x
:
.
c-
c
-
s:
:
;
x
:
.
s
:
:
'
T
\
~
~
$
l
~
~
!
:
.
5
~
~
~
~
~
fi
t
f
i
t
f
i
t
f
i
t
f
i
t
f
i
t
f
i
t
f
i
t
f
i
t
f
i
t
f
i
t
f
i
t
--
J
0
1
0
)
0
)
01
c
.
u
I
\
)
I
\
)
~
~
~
c.u
I\
)
c
o
--
J
0
I
\
)
01
c
o
c.
u
0
..
.
.
.
.
(:
,
C
o
i
\
)
0
,
~
i
\
)
0,
(
,
)
~
:.
.
.
O
J
0
,
01
c
o
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
c
o
0)
c
o
--
J
0
c.
u
c
o
't
I
;x
:
.
::
T
(I)
(I
)
(')
c::
(I)
(I
)
(I
)
:
:
s
..
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
"
"
"
""
"
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
c
o
co
-
-
J
0
)
~.
.
.
(1
)
co
-
-
J
0
)
0
1
c.u
1\)
""
"
a
0
0
a
00
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
.
(:
,
(
:
,
(
:
,
I!
J
(:
,
(
:
,
(
:
,
(
:
,
(:
,
(
:
,
(:
,
.
a
00
a
0
0
a
(I
)
I!
J
't
I
00
0
0
a
0
a
~
~
~
~
~
cf2
.
III
II
I
I!
J
cf2
.
c
f
2
.
c
f
2
.
c
f
2
.
cf
2
.
c
f
2
.
::
s
..
.
I!J
0
0
(D
'
(')
Q.
.
(I)
II
I
'T
\
(1
)
(')
..
.
s:
:
I!
J
..
.
(I
)
:;
E
ii
I
"'"
'
(1
)
II
I
(I
)
II
I
(I
)c:
:
II
I
::
T
't
I
(I
)
(')::
T
(I
)(X
I
"t
I
(I
)
II
I
fi
t
f
i
t
f
i
t
f
i
t
f
i
t
f
i
t
f
i
t
f
i
t
f
i
t
f
i
t
f
i
t
f
i
t
f
i
t
~
~
~
c.
u
c
.
u
c
.
u
c
.
u
I
\
)
I
\
)
I
\
)
.
.
.
.
.
...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
~'
1
\
)
o
C
o
o
,
"
c
.
u
-
"
"
"
C
o
m
"
c
.
u
C
o
o
,
"
c
.
u
co
0
)
c.
u
.
.
.
.
.
.
c
o
0
)
c.
u
.
.
.
.
.
.
~
co
0
--
J
0
1
co
~
c
o
c.
u
c
o
I
\
:
)
-
-
J
I
\
)
-
-
J
I
\
)
I
\
)
--
J
I
\
)
".
.
.
-
J
~
C
o
m
~
C
o
m
-
"
"
"
o
,
C
o
C
o
m
o
01
-
-
J
c.
u
c
o
0
1
...
.
.
.
c
.
u
a
0
0
co
..
.
.
.
.
-
-
J
co
-
-
J
c
o
c
o
c
o
c
o
c
o
0
I\
)
~
co
c
o
c
o
fi
t
f
i
t
f
i
t
f
i
t
f
i
t
f
i
t
f
i
t
f
i
t
f
i
t
f
i
t
f
i
t
f
i
t
f
i
t
~
~
c.
u
c
.
u
c
.
u
c
.
u
c
.
u
I
\
)
I
\
)
I
\
)
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
...
.
.
.
"c
.
u
-
"
"
"
C
o
"
.
.
.
-
J
o
,
"
c
.
u
-
"
"
"
C
o
m
"
c
.
u
m
~
'
1
\
)
co
c
o
--
J
0
1
~
c.
u
I
\
)
.
.
.
.
.
.
~
co
c
o
c
o
--
J
c.
u
.
.
.
.
.
.
c
o
-
-
J
0
1
I\
)
-
-
J
I
\
)
~
I
\
)
".
.
.
-
J
o
-
"
"
"
~
"
.
.
.
-
J
'
:
.
.
J
o
-
"
"
"
o
,
C
o
"
c
.
u
m
m
co
0
)
0
I
\
)
~
co
0
)
0
0
0
0)
~
--
J
I\
)
c
.
u
0
I\
)
~
..
.
.
.
c
.
u
0
I\
)
~
a
I\
)
c
o
fi
t
f
i
t
f
i
t
f
i
t
f
i
t
f
i
t
f
i
t
~
f
i
t
f
i
t
co
c
o
0
)
U
1
~
I
\
)
..
.
.
.
0
co
c
o
..
.
.
.
.
-
-
J
~
0
--
J
c
.
u
f
i
t
f
i
t
f
i
t
c
o
...
.
.
.
Co
~
o
o
'
1
\
)
"
.
.
.
-
J
-
"
"
"
o
,
0
0
0
0,
C
o
~
--
J
.
.
.
.
.
.
c.
u
-
-
J
.
.
.
.
.
.
c.
u
-
-
J
c.
u
-
-
J
0
0)
c.
u
c
o
0
)
co
U
1
co
0
)
0
c:
:
II
I
::
T
't
I
Co
)
II
I
-.
:
:
:
I\
)
(I)
::s
11
1
(I
)
::
s
(')
(I
)
::
E
..
.
0
::s..
.
II
I
(')
(I
)
..
.
a
'
t
I
't
I
.,
II
I
II
I
(
'
)
('
)
-
,
..
.
-
(I
)
't
I
0
II
I
II
I
0
-.
:
:
:
.
,
3
'
C
(I
)
::s..
.
(I
)
::s (I
)
II
I..
.
c:
:
::
s
II
I
::
T
II
I
::
s
't
I
(I
)
't
I (I
)
III ::s
't
I
-.:
:
:
(')..
.
::s
('
)
C
0
-
,
::
s
:
:
I
:
..
.
(
I
)
.,
.
,
II
I
(
I
)
('
)
:
:
s
..
.
(
'
)
II
I
(
I
)
::
s
C
'
a.
(I)
~
i
('
)
(
I
)
:;
:
(
I
)
-.
::s
0
-
0
a
.
.,
II
I
'C
::
T
(')
0
't
I
a
0
.,
:
e
II
I
(
I
)
~
.
,
(1
)
(/)
""
C
J
;
x
:
.
:
:
:
:
I!
J
:
:
I
:
Q
.
.
CO
Q
)
Q
)
(1
)
C
1
:
:
:
r
::
:
r
o
0
3
""
C
J
-.
,
(1
)
0
..
.
.
.
.
~
~
..
.
.
.
.
~
00
0
00
0
$3
,
50
0
,
00
0
$3
,
00
0
,
00
0
g
$
2
50
0
,
00
0
~
$
2
00
0
,
00
0
Ct
J 2
$
1
50
0
,
00
0
ex
:
00
0
00
0
$5
0
0
00
0
Co
n
t
r
a
c
t
C
o
m
p
a
r
i
s
o
n
-
u
s
i
n
g
2
0
0
3
IP
C
o
n
o
n
l
e
v
e
l
i
z
e
d
p
r
i
c
i
n
g
'5
1
\
'5
C
O
'5
C
b
'5
,
,
~
,
,
'5
"
c5
'
'5
'5
"
~
"
~
~
'5
Le
v
e
l
o
f
P
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e
("
)
(j
j
"'1
J
~
:
:
:
ro
:
:
+
0
-
(Q
r
o
r
o
CD
(
)
::
r
c..
v
::
r
o
0
3
"'1
J
CD
0
...
.
.
;
a
.
:
:
E
N.
.
.
.
.
S
!
;
heoretical Project
Nameplate
Capacity Factor
Annual estimated MWH
Percent of estimated
performance
60.00%
70.00%
80.00%
90.00%
100.00%
110.00%
120.00%
130.00%
140.00%
150.00%
160.00%
170.00%
180.00%
Idaho Power Company
Cogeneration and Small Power Production
20.00 MW
30.00%
560
Non Levelized 2003 Prices
Comments of Idaho Power
Attachment 1
Page 4 of 12
Idaho Power contract PacifiCorppayment Contract Payment
Difference between Idaho Power
contract and PacifiCorp contract
$937 682
094 100
250,336
931 787
$2,146 293
360,798
$2,517 217
673,452
829 870
986 074
142 277
$3,298 695
$3,454 931
030 122
201 957
373 594
931 787
146 293
360 798
532 634
$2,704 271
876 106
047 711
219 315
391 151
562 788
Made use of 2003 Idaho Power Schedule 86 Prices
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dee
$27.
$32.
$35.
$25.
$21.
$24.
$37.22
$33.
$30.
$27,
$29.
$32.
($92,440)
($107 857)
($123 258)
($15,417)
($30 819)
($46 236)
($61 637)
($77 038)
($92,456)
($107 857)
50
0
,
00
0
00
0
,
00
0
$3
,
50
0
00
0
C
$
3
,
00
0
00
0
E
$
2
50
0
00
0
~
$
2
00
0
,
00
0
s:
:
s:
:
:
c(
$
1
50
0
,
00
0
00
0
,
00
0
$5
0
0
00
0
Co
n
t
r
a
c
t
C
o
m
p
a
r
i
s
o
n
-
u
s
i
n
g
20
0
4
1
P
C
o
N
o
n
l
e
v
e
l
i
z
e
d
p
r
i
c
i
n
g
Pa
c
i
f
i
C
o
r
p
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
Id
a
h
o
P
o
w
e
r
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
~
~
~
~
~
~
'v
Le
v
e
l
o
f
P
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e
"'U
:
:
t
:
-
ID
:
:
;
C
l
.
(C
I
D
I
D
CD
(
)
:::
J
'
"
::
:
J
'
"
0
3-
0
CD
0
..
.
.
;
a
.
:
i
i
:
N.
.
.
.
~
heoretical Project
Nameplate
Capacity Factor
Annual estimated MWH
Percent of estimated
performance
60.00%
70,00%
80,00%
90.00%
100.00%
110.00%
120.00%
130.00%
140,00%
150.00%
160.00%
170.00%
180.00%
Idaho Power Company
Cogeneration and Small Power Production
20.00
30.00%
52,560
Non Levelized 2004 Prices
Idaho Power contract PacifiCorp
payment ContJ"~t Payment
080 713
260 992
$1,441 054
117,424
352 542
587 661
767 940
948,002
128 281
$3,308 312
$3,488 343
668,622
848 684
$1,129 112
$1,317 460
505 591
117,424
352 542
587 661
776 009
964 140
152,488
$3,340 583
$3,528,678
$3,717 026
$3,905,157
Made use of 2004 Idaho Power Schedule 86 Prices
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
$42.
$31.
$31.
$36.
$31.
$26.
$40.
$30.
$29.
$34.
$39.
$36.
Comments of Idaho Power
Attachment 1
Page 6 of 12
Difference between Idaho Power
contract and PacifiCorp contract
($48,399)
($56,468)
($64 537)
($8 069)
($16 138)
($24 207)
($32 271 )
($40,335)
($48,404 )
($56,473)
50
0
00
0
00
0
00
0
50
0
00
0
'E
$
3
,
00
0
00
0
::
J E
$
2
50
0
,
00
0
c:
:
c ~
$
2
00
0
,
00
0
c:
:
c
$
1
50
0
00
0
00
0
,
00
0
$5
0
0
,
00
0
Co
n
t
r
a
c
t
C
o
m
p
a
r
i
s
o
n
-
u
s
i
n
g
2
0
0
3
IP
C
o
l
e
v
e
l
i
z
e
d
p
r
i
c
i
n
g
Pa
c
i
f
i
C
o
r
p
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
Id
a
h
o
P
o
w
e
r
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
~
~
~
~
~
~
'v
Le
v
e
l
o
f
P
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e
::
J
(f
)
"'0
;p
::
:
oo
~
c
.
cc
o
o
o
o
CD
(
)
::
r
::
r
o
3"
'
0
CD
0
..
.
.
.
.
I
.
~
~
I'V
.
.
.
.
.
.
I
.
~
heoretical Proje,ct
Nameplate
Capacity Factor
Annual estimated MWH
Percent of estimated
performance
60.00%
70.00%
80.00%
90.00%
100.00%
110.00%
120.00%
130.00%
140,00%
150.00%
160.00%
170.00%
180.00%
Idaho Power Company
Cogeneration and Small Power Production
20.00 MW
30,00%
560
Levelized 2003 Prices
Idaho Power contract PacifiCorppayment Contract Payment
$937 682
094 100
250 336
300 968
556,468
811 968
$2,968 386
$3,124 621
281 040
$3,437 243
593,446
749 865
906 100
226 987
431 ,662
636 100
300 968
556,468
811 968
$3,016,642
221 081
$3,425 755
$3,630 155
834 555
039 229
243 668
Made use of 2003 Idaho Power Schedule 86 Prices
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
$27.
$32.
$35.
$25.
$21.
$24.
$37,
$33.
$30.
$27.
$29.
$32.
Comments of Idaho Power
Attachment 1
Page 8 of 12
Difference between Idaho Power
contract and PacifiCorp contract
($289,305)
($337 561 )
($385 764)
($48,256)
($96,459)
($144,716)
($192 912)
($241 109)
($289 365)
($337 568)
$5
,
00
0
,
00
0
50
0
00
0
00
0
00
0
..
.
$
3
50
0
,
00
0
0
$
3
00
0
00
0
~
$
2
50
0
,
00
0
C'O ~
$
2
00
0
,
00
0
c:
(
$
1
50
0
00
0
00
0
,
00
0
$5
0
0
,
00
0
Co
n
t
r
a
c
t
C
o
m
p
a
r
i
s
o
n
-
u
s
i
n
g
2
0
0
4
IP
C
o
l
e
v
e
l
i
z
e
d
p
r
i
c
i
n
g
Pa
c
i
f
i
C
o
r
p
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
'"
4
-
-
Id
a
h
o
P
o
w
e
r
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
~
~
~
~
~
~
Le
v
e
l
o
f
P
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e
(J
)
""
O
~
:
:
OJ
:
:
;
0
.
.
(0
O
J
O
J
CD
(
)
::
r
::
r
o
3"
"
0
CD
0
-,
,
;
l
~
N-
,
,
~
heoretical Project
Nameplate
Capacity Factor
Annual estimated MWH
Percent of estimated
j)erformance
60.00%
70.00%
80,00%
90.00%
100.00%
110.00%
120.00%
130.00%
140.00%
150.00%
160.00%
170.00%
180.00%
Idaho Power Company
Cogeneration and Small Power Production
20.00
30.00%
52,560
Levelized 2004 Prices
Idaho Power contract PacifiCorppayment Contract Payment
080 713
260 992
$1,441 054
557 579
841 572
125 566
$3,305 845
$3,485,907
$3,666,186
846 217
026 248
206 526
386 589
363 824
591 324
818 562
557 579,
841 ,572
125 566
$3,353 066
$3,580,304
807,805
035 000
262 195
$4,489 695
716 933
Made use of 2004 Idaho Power Schedule 86 Prices
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
$42.
$31.
$31.
$36.
$31,
$26.
$40.
$30.
$29.
$34.
$39.
$36.
Comments of Idaho Power
Attachment 1
Page 10 of 12
Difference between Idaho Power
contract and PacifiCorp contract
($283 111 )
($330 333)
($377 ,508)
($47 222)
($94 397)
($141 619)
($188,783)
($235,947)
($283,169)
($330,344)
$5
,
00
0
,
00
0
50
0
,
00
0
00
0
00
0
..
.
$
3
,
50
0
,
00
0
0
$
3
,
00
0
00
0
::
$
2
50
0
00
0
r:
:
$
2
00
0
00
0
r:
:
c:
(
$
1
50
0
00
0
00
0
,
00
0
$5
0
0
,
00
0
Co
n
t
r
a
c
t
C
o
m
p
a
r
i
s
o
n
-
u
s
i
n
g
2
0
0
5
IP
C
o
l
e
v
e
l
i
z
e
d
P
r
i
c
i
n
g
ci
f
i
C
o
l
p
C
O
l
l
t
l
.
Id
a
h
o
P
o
w
e
r
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
~
~
~
~
~
~
'v
Le
v
e
l
o
f
P
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e
("
)
::J (J
)
-u
0
tl
)
)
;
;
0
0
:
:
:
to
::
=
:
c
.
.
CD
t
l
)
t
l
)
..
.
.
.
(
"
)
:
:
r
..
.
.
.
:
:
r
0
0
3
CD
0
..
.
.
.
~
~
..
.
.
.
heoretical Project
Nameplate
Capacity Factor
Annual estimated MWH
Percent of estimated
performance
60.00%
70.00%
80.00%
90.00%
100.00%
110.00%
120.00%
130.00%
140.00%
150.00%
160.00%
170.00%
180.00%
Idaho Power Company
Cogeneration and Small Power Production
20,00 MW
30.00%
560
Levelized 2005 Prices
Idaho Power contract PacifiCorppayment Contract Payment
352 079
$1,577,618
$1,802 899
$2,382 904
647 502
912 100
137 638
362 919
588 458
813 698
038,939
264,477
$4,489,758
270 679
$1,482 642
694 360
382 904
647 502
912 100
$3,124 063
335,781
$3,547 744
759,422
971,100
183 063
394 782
Made use of 2005 Idaho Power Schedule 86 Prices
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
$38.
$40,
$41.
$40.
$23,
$28.
$35.
$52.
$60.
$67.
$59.
$72,
Comments of Idaho Power
Attachment 1
Page 12 of 12
Difference between Idaho Power
contract and PacifiCorp contract
$81,400
$94 976
$108 539
$13 575
$27 138
$40 714
$54 276
$67 838
$81,413
$94 976
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on the 7th day of March , 2006, I served a true
and correct copy of the within and foregoing IDAHO POWER COMPANY'
COMMENTS upon the following named parties by first class mail , and addressed to the
following:
Scott Woodbury
Deputy Attorney General
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
472 W, Washington Street
O, Box 83720
Boise , ID 83720-0074
----2L- Hand Delivered
- U.S. Mail
Overnight Mail
FAX
E-mail
Lisa Nordstrom
Dean Brockbank
PacifiCorp
825 NE Multnomah , Suite 1800
Portland , OR 97232
Hand Delivered
----2L- U.S. Mail
Overnight Mail
FAX
E-mail
Bruce Griswold , Mgr., Origination
PacifiCorp
825 NE Multnomah , Suite 1800
Portland , OR 97232
Hand Delivered
----2L- U.S. Mail
Overnight Mail
FAX
E-mail
Dean J, Miller
McDevitt & Miller LLP
O, Box 2564
Boise, ID 83701
Hand Delivered
----2L- U.S, Mail
Overnight Mail
FAX
E-mail
(lti
BARTON L. KLINE
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE