19960717_1.docx

MINUTES OF SPECIAL DECISION MEETING
July 17, 1996 - 1:30 p.m.
In attendance at this time were Commissioners Ralph Nelson, Marsha H. Smith and Dennis Hansen and staff members Brad Purdy, Tony Jones, Gary Richardson, Rick Sterling and Myrna Walters. Also in attendance was Jeanette Bowman of Idaho Power Company.
Subject of the special decision meeting was Brad Purdy/Tony Jones’ July 11, 1996 Decision Memorandum re: Case No. IPC-E-95-15 In the Matter of the Application of Idaho Power Company for an Order Revising the Rates, Terms and Conditions under which Idaho Power Purchases Nonfirm Energy From Qualifying Facilities.
Commissioner Smith said she wanted to compliment Brad Purdy and Tony Jones (staff) for their fine decision memo that was extremely clear and concise. She thanked them for their work.
Commissioner Nelson commented he had asked Tony Jones about the rates on Options A and B.
Tony said over time they would be very close. Could grandfather in the one project under it and since it is a reasonable resource, could put it on the variable rate option and it would come out over time the same.
Page 4 - Elimination of Rate Option C.
Tony explained the calculation is published in the company’s IRP every two years.
Commissioner Nelson asked why couldn’t if they are going to have Option B where they pay a variable rate by the monthly, why couldn’t they use that same rate to be paid under Option C?
Tony said he didn’t see why you couldn’t pay them the variable rate.
Commissioner Nelson said it would make more sense if we had more than one supplier.
Brad Purdy said he was surprised at the reaction.
Tony Jones said it wouldn’t stimulate many small generators.
Commissioner Nelson said they respond like it is a time to call.
Eliminate the 3 mill adder - eliminate Rate Option A and switch the one producer to B.
Liked staff recommendation on Rate Option C.
Commissioner Hansen said he wondered what the benefit was of retaining Option C.
Commissioner Nelson said if we could he would like to encourage that kind of generation.
Other choice is to eliminate Option C and then bring it back if necessary.
Brad Purdy said if there is only one supplier, what difference does it make?
What harm would there be in maintaining Option C? Company’s argument seems to be more theoretical.
Commissioner Smith commented - with eliminate of C you would be sending the wrong signal on competition.
Tony Jones said the whole purpose of Schedule 86 was to be a stimulant - taking it out would be counter to that.
Commissioner Smith said she thought it was priced wrong. Even under staff proposal it was wrong. Would like to get it right.
Commissioner Hansen said Option C prevents company from recovering all of their costs. Pricing needs to be fixed. Would feel more comfortable if it were priced correctly.
**Charging three mills for backup would be a move in the right direction.
Tony Jones said if you meter all the power they generate, it would be accurate.
Commissioner Smith suggested charging in it for power from Idaho Power.
Tony Jones suggested fee for this alternative.
Commissioner Smith said that was what she would like to see.
There is only one customer under this option but didn’t want to see this option go away.
Commissioner Nelson said he would suggest asking the company for a proposal.
Staff will contact Idaho Power informally.
Commissioner Smith said she had concerns with doing away with Option A. It is small hydro and it is truly nonfirm.
Staff will work informally with Idaho Power Company and if they can agree to a price, will retain Option C.
Meeting was adjourned.
Dated at Boise, Idaho, this 30th day of July, 1996.
Myrna J. Walters, Commission Secretary