20070306final_order_no_30262.pdf

Office of the Secretary
Service Date
March 6, 2007
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF THE SCHEDULED
FILING OF ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER'
ELECTRIC INTEGRATED RESOURCE
PLAN (lRP)ORDER NO. 30262
CASE NO. P AC-07-
On February 23, 2007, Rocky Mountain Power (a division of PacifiCorp) filed a
Motion for Extension of Time" to postpone the filing of its 2006 Integrated Resource Plan
(IRP). Rocky Mountain s IRP was scheduled to be filed in December 2006 but the Company
now requests permission to file its IRP no later than May 30, 2007. Based upon reasons set out
below, we find there is good cause to grant the requested relief.
BACKGROUND
The IRP is a planning document that generally sets forth how electric and gas utilities
intend to meet the energy requirements of their customers over a 10-year cycle. In Order No.
22299 the Commission directed each electric utility to file a biennial IRP that analyzes its
customer base, load growth, supply-side resources, and demand-side management (DSM)
resources. In December 1998, the Commission issued Order No. 27835 directing Rocky
Mountain to file its IRP in December 2000 and every two years thereafter.
THE MOTION
In its Motion for Extension of Time, Rocky Mountain states that the delay in
completing and filing its 2006 IRP is attributable to two primary reasons. First and foremost
Rocky Mountain and PacifiCorp are still in the process of integrating themselves into the
MidAmerican Energy Holding Company. In March 2006, the Commission approved
MidAmerican s acquisition ofPacifiCorp. Order No. 29998. As part ofthe integrated operating
company, Rocky Mountain states that it has just finished its "first long-range planning cycle
under (MidAmerican)." Motion at 2. Rocky Mountain indicates that it intends to incorporate the
outcome of MidAmerican s planning process into its IRP.
Second, Rocky Mountain notes that it is currently in the process of drafting a request
for proposal (RFP) to procure additional long-term resources for 2012. While an RFP does not
require prior approval from this Commission, such prior approval is required for Utah and
ORDER NO. 30262
Oregon. Rocky Mountain reports that its Utah RFP is currently under review but Oregon has
rejected the draft RFP. Rocky Mountain asserts that additional time for filing the IRP is
necessary so that the RFP can be reflected in the IRP filing. Id.
Consequently, Rocky Mountain makes two requests. First, it asks that the
Commission approve an extension oftime to file its IRP to no later than May 30, 2007. Second
the Company requests that the filing date for future IRPs be adjusted to coincide with its business
planning cycle with MidAmerican. Rocky Mountain requests that future IRPs be due no later
than the last business day of March on a biennial basis beginning in 2009.
COMMISSION FINDINGS
We shall treat the Company s Motion for Extension of Time as a petition requesting
an amendment of a filing directive contained in an existing Order. IDAPA 31.01.01.053. Based
upon our review of Rocky Mountain s Motion, we grant Rocky Mountain s request. Idaho Code
~ 61-624. Given the procedural nature of the request, we find there is good cause to grant the
requested relief without further notice or Modified Procedure.
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Rocky Mountain Power s Motion for Extension of
Time is granted. The Company shall file its Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) no later than May
2007. To avoid confusion, the Company shall designate its filing as the 2007 IRP.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Commission modify Order No. 27835 to
provide that Rocky Mountain shall file future IRPs by the last business day of March on a
biennial basis beginning in 2009.
THIS IS A FINAL ORDER. Any person interested in this Order (or in issues finally
decided by this Order) or in interlocutory Orders previously issued in this Case No. P AC-07-
03 may petition for reconsideration within twenty-one (21) days of the service date of this Order
with regard to any matter decided in this Order or in interlocutory Orders previously issued in
this case. Within seven (7) days after any person has petitioned for reconsideration, any other
person may cross-petition for reconsideration. See Idaho Code ~ 61-626.
ORDER NO. 30262
DONE by Order of the Idaho Public Utilities Commission at Boise, Idaho this fp f/..
day of March 2007.
MARSHA H. SMITH, COMMISSIONER
ATTEST:
~fJ
. D. Jewell
Commission Secretary
bls/O:PAC-07-03
ORDER NO. 30262