20100528Tallman Direct.pdf

lfllOHAY28 Py
1112: OS
I'UTiLI
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF THE )
APPLICATION OF ROCKY )
MOUNTAIN POWER FOR )
APPROVAL OF CHANGES TO ITS )
ELECTRC SERVICE SCHEDULES )
AND A PRICE INCREASE OF $27.7 )
MILLION, OR APPROXIMATELY )13.7 PERCENT )
CASE NO. PAC-E-10-07
Direct Testimony of Mark R. Tallman
ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER
CASE NO. PAC-E-10-07
May 2010
1 Q.Please state your name, business address and present position with Rocky
2 Mountain Power ("Company").
3 A.My name is Mark R. Tallman. My business address is 825 NE Multnomah, Suite
4 2000, Portand, Oregon 97232. My present position is Vice President of
5 Renewable Resource Acquisition.
6 Qualifications
7 Q.Please describe your educational and professional background.
8 A.I have a Bachelor of Science Degree in Electrical Engineering from Oregon State
9 University and a Masters of Business Administration from City University of
10 Seattle. I am also a Registered Professional Engineer in the states of Oregon and
11 Washington. I have been the Vice President of Renewable Resource Acquisition
12 since December 2007. Pror to that, I was Managing Director of Renewable
13 Resource Acquisition from April 2006 to December 2007. I have worked at the
14 Company for more than 24 years in a varety of positions of increasing
15 responsibilty, including the commercial and trading organization; the
16 Company's engineering organization; the retail distrbution organization; and five
17 years as a District Manáger.
18 Purpose and Overview of Testimony
19 Q.What is the. purpose of your testiony?
20 A.The purpose of my testimony is to demonstrate the prudence of the Seven Mile
21 Hil, Glenrock, Rollng Hils, Seven Mile Hil II, Glenrock il, High Plains and
22 McFadden Ridge I wind-powered generation resources (collectively the "Wind
23 Resources" and individually a "Wind Resource"). The Company is also adding
Tallman, Di - 1
Rocky Mountai Power
14 Q.
15 A.
16
the Dunlap I wind-powered generation resource that is addressed in the testimony
of Mr. Stefan A. Bird.
Please summarize your testimony.
I star by describing the Company's integrated resource plan ("IRP") and how it is
utilzed to identify and quantify the need and timing of new supply-side resources.
I also provide an overview of the relevant MidAmerican Energy Holdigs
Company ("MEHC") transaction commtments related to acquisition of renewable
resources. Finally, I provide a description of the Wind Resources, the decision-
makng process leading to their acquisition and a description of updated
information for each Wind Resource.
What were the commercial operation dates for each Wind Resource?
Each Wind Resource is in service. As shown in the table below, the commercial
operation date ("COD") vares by Wind Resource.
Wind Resource COD
Wind
Resource COD
Seven Mile Hill December 31, 2008
Glenrk December 31, 2008
Rolling Hils Januar 17, 2009
Seven Mile Hil II December 31, 2008
Glenrock II J anuar 17, 2009
Hil!h Plais September 13, 200
McFadden Ridge I September 29, 2009
Please summarize each Wind Resource.
The table below summarzes each Wind Resource, its location and its associated
investment.
Tallman, Di - 2
Rocky Mountain Power
W. dR SIIesourceummarv
Wind
Resource MW Location Investment COD
Seven Mile Hil 99.0 Medicine Bow, WY $206,070,352 1213112008
Glenrock 99.0 Glenrock, WY $217,015,087 12/3112008
Rollinl! Hils 99.0 Glenrk, WY $200,234,936 1/17/2009
Seven Mile Hil II 19.5 Medicine Bow, WY $41,304,822 12/3112008
Glenrock II 39.0 Glenrock, WY $86,840,843 11171200
High Plais 99.0 McFadden, WY $232,518,676 9/13/2009
McFadden Ridge I 28.5 McFadden, WY $56,511,031 9129/2009
1 Integrated Resource Plan
2 Q.
3 A.
4
5
6
7
8 Q.
9 A.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Please briefly describe the IRP process.
The IRP is a strategic planning tool that presents a framework for resource
acquisitions to ensure the Company continues to provide reliable, low-cost service
with manageable and reasonable risk to customers. The IRP builds on the
Company's prior resource planning efforts and reflects significant advancements
in portfolio modeling.and risk analysis.
What is the main purpose of the IRP?
The mandate for an IRP is to ensure that the Company has, on a long-term basis,
an adequate and reliable electrcity supply at the lowest reasonable cost and to
ensure that such supply is provided or fulfilled in a timely and planned maner
consistent with the long-term public interest. The IRP serves as a strategic
roadmap to assist the Company in determning and implementing its long-term
resource strategy. In doing so, the IRP accounts for state specific IRP
requirements, expected customer resource needs, the current planning
environment, corporate business goals and certin commtments made by the
Company as par of MEHC' s acquisition of PacifiCorp, including the acquisition
of renewable resources.
Tallman, Di - 3
Rocky Mountain Power
1 Q.
2 A.
3
4
5
6
7 Q.
8 A.
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
What is the outcome of the IRP process?
The outcome of the IRP process is a preferred portfolio that represents a balance
of resource additions that meet future customer needs, minimize cost, balance
diverse stakeholder interests and address environmental concerns. The
Company's IRP includes an action plan that is intended to inform and provide
guidance for the Company's resource procurment activities.
How do the most recent IRPs address renewable resources?
The 2004 IRP was filed with the Idaho Public Utilties Commssion
("Commssion") on Januar 21, 2005, and the Commssion acknowledged the
2004 IRP on August 26,2005. The 2007 IRP was fied with the Commssion on
May 30, 2007, and the Commssion acknowledged the 2007 IRP on October 15,
2007. The 2008 IRP was fied with the Commssion on May 29, 2009, and the
Commssion acknowledged the 2008 IRP on September 15,2009.
Each of these IRPs identifes a need to acquire 1,400 megawatts ("MW)
. or more of cost-effective renewable resources.! Indeed, the acquisition of
renewable resources is the first action item listed for each such IRP. For example,
the 2007 IRP identifies over 2,000 MW of cost-effective renewable resources to
be acquired by 2013 and the 2008 IR tagets to acquire an incremental 1,400
MW by 2018, which is consistent with the taget contained in the 2007 IR. By
2018, acquisition of renewable resources reaches 2,540 MW in the 2008 IRP,
which includes over 1,400 MW of resources added from 2009 though 2018.
1 Wind-powered generation resources served as the proxy resource in each IRP.
Tallman, Di - 4
Rocky Mountain Power
1 Q.
2
3 A.
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14 Q.
15
16 A.
17
18
19
20
21
22
Do the referenced IRPs address the procurement process for renewable
resources?
Yes. Generally, each IRP outlines a resource procurement strtegy as par of the
IRP action plan.2 The Company procures resources in accordance with the then-
curent law, rules, and/or guidelines in each of the states in which PacifiCorp
operates. Meaning that if a jursdiction has a requirement to issue a request for
proposal ("RFP") then the Company would comply with the reuirement.
Specifically, the Company has relied on periodic issuance of RFPs and pursuit of
opportnities through bilateral negotiations, contracting with Qualifying Facilties
defined by the Public Utilties Regulatory Policies Act of 1978and self-
development for the addition of renewable resources to its portolio. Reliance on
multiple procurement approaches enables the Company to achieve regulatory
compliance and react effectively to market developments.
Have other state commisions acknowledged the referenced IRPs and their
associated action plan on renewable resource acquisition?
Yes. The commssions in Washington, Oregon, and Utah have acknowledged the
2008 IRP. The Wyoming Public Service Commssion adopted Rule 253 in 2009,
which requires the.Company to fie an IRP but does not include an
acknowledgment proceeding. In California, the Company provides its IRP on an
informational basis and is not required to seek acknowledgement. Each state
commssion acknowledged the earlier IRPs referenced, with the exception of the
Utah commssion for only the 2007 IRP.
2 See 2004 IRP chapter 9,2007 IRP chapter 8 and 2008 IRP chapter 9.
Tallman, Di - 5
Rocky Mountain Power
1 Q.In its acknowledgement of the 2004, 2007 and 2008 IRPs, did the
2 Commission object to the acquisition of renewable resources?
3 A.No. In fact, the Commssion noted Staffs support for acquisition of cost-
4 effective renewable resources in the Commssion's 2007 IRP Acceptance of
5 Filng.
6 MEHC Transaction Commitments
7 Q.Please provide an overview of the MEHC transaction commitments related
8 to the acquiition of renewable resources.
9 A.As par of the regulatory approvals related to the acquisition of the Company,
10 MEHC and the Company commtted to:
11 . Bring at least 100 MW of cost-effective wind resources in service within one
12 year of the close of the transaction;
13 . Have 400 MW of cost-effective new renewable resources in the Company's
14 generation portfolio by December 31,2007; and
15 . Reaffir the Company's commtment to acquire 1,400 MW of cost-effective
16 new renewable generation resources.
17 Each of the Wind Resources was acquired consistent with these commtments
18 and, in paricular, in support of the commtment to have 1,400 MW of cost-
19 effective new renewable resources in the portfolio.
20 Wind Resource Acquisitions
21 Q.Please generally describe the Wind Resources.
22 A.Each Wind Resource is an individual project consisting of wind tubine
23 generators ("WTGs" or a "WTG"), an electrcal collector system, access roads,
24 and required communication and control facilties (e.g., meterig, hardware,
25 software, and associated communication circuits). In the case of Seven Mile Hil,
Tallan, Di - 6
Rocky Mountain Power
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 Q.
9 A.
10
11 Q.
12 A.
13
14
15
16
17
Glenrock and High Plains, the project also included an operations/maintenance
("O&M") building, collector substation and interconnection facilties. While
Rollng Hils required its own collector substation, Seven Mile Hil II, Glenrock
III and McFadden Ridge I did not. Finally, Rollng Hils, Seven Mile Hil II,
Glenrock III, High Plains and McFadden Ridge I did not require the construction
of a new interconnection substation; respectively utilizing the Freezeout, Windstar
or Foote Creek substations instead.
What WTG do the Wind Resources utilze?
The General Electric Company ("G.E.") 1.5 MW model SLE WTG. The number
ofWTGs at each Wind Resource is shown in the table below.
Wind Resource WTGs
G.E.
Wind 1.5MW
Resource WTGs
Seven Mile Hil 66
Glenrock 66
Rolling Hils 66
Seven Mile Hil II 13
Glenrock II 26
Hil!h Plains 66
McFadden Ridge I 19
Who owns the land where the Wind Resources reside?
The Company is leasing land from private entities and the state of Wyoming for
each Wind Resource with the exception of Glenrock, Rollng Hils and Glenrock
III. Facilities associated with Glenrock, Rollng Hils and Glenrock III are
primarly located on land owned by the Company that was previously used to
support coal mining activities. Minor levels of facilties are located on state of
Wyoming lands.
Tallman, Di - 7
Rocky Mountain Power
1 Q.
2 A.
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12 Q.
13 A.
14
15
16
17
18 Q.
19
20 A.
21
Please elaborate on the Company-owned land.
The Glenrock, Rollng Hils and Glenrock III resources are all located on property
owned by the Company that includes the location of the Company's now
reclaimed Dave Johnston coal mine. Mining operations took place from
approximately 1958 though September of 2000. After mining operations ceased,
the Company reclaimed the land pursuant to its Wyoming administered Federal
mining permt. The siting of these renewable resources at this location serves as a
testimonial to environmental stewardship and continued asset utilzation for the
benefit of customers. This is the only instance I am awar of in the western
United States where wind projects have been located at the site of a reclaimed
coal mine.
What factors does the Company consider before acquiring new resources?
The decision as to whether it is in the best interests of customers for the Company
to acquire a resource is made after reviewing a detailed overview of the project
including the contract support and counterpary guarantees, the risks, the need as
established by the IRP, the financial assessment, and the justification of the
project.
Did the Company follow this general process in the acquisition of each Wind
Resource?
Yes. The Company followed this process in determning that each Wind
Resource is prudent and in the public interest to pursue.
Tallman, Di - 8
Rocky Mountain Power
1 Q.
2
3
4 A.
5
6
7 Q.
8
9 A.
10
11
12 Q.
13
14 A.
15
16
17 Q.
18
19 A.
20
21
Was the decision to acquire the Wind Resources consistent with the decision
making process the Company has used in adding other renewable resources
that have been before this Commission?
Yes. Some of the renewable resources that have previously been before this
Commssion include the Leaning Juniper I, Marengo, Goodnoe Hills and
Marengo II wind-powered generation resources.
Did the Company perform an evaluation of the wind potentialfor each Wind
Resource?
Yes. The Company commssioned a third-par to perform an evaluation of the
wind potential for each Wind Resource. The Company's decision to acquire each
Wind Resource took into account the technical wind study.3.
What other factors did the Company take into consideration when making
the decision to acquire each Wind Resource?
The Company took into account both quantitative and qualitative factors. The
quantitative factors included an economic analysis of the resource. See
Confidential Exhibit Nos. 20 through 26.
Were the economics of each Wind Resource in line with the alternative
undifferentiated power market?
Yes. Each Wind Resource compares favorably with the expected non-
differentiated power market. See economic analysis results contained in
Confidential Exhibit Nos. 20 though 26.
3 The decision to proceed with Seven Mile Hil II was informed by the wind study associated with Seven
Mile Hil and the decision to proceed with Glenrock II was informed by the wind studies associated with
Glenrock and Rollng Hils.
Tallman, Di - 9
Rocky Mountain Power
1 Q.
2
3 A.
4
5
6
7
8
9 Q.
10 A.
11
12
13
14
15 Q.
16 A.
17
18
19
20
21
22 Q.
23 A.
What qualitative factors did the Company take into account when making
the decision to acquire each Wind Resource?
The Company took the following qualtative factors into account: the
specifications of the specific Wind Resource; the availabilty of major equipment
(e.g., WTGs); the availabilty, or lack thereof, of alternative sites; applicable state
and federal tax advantages; the availabilty of a constrction contractor; available
infrastructure; termnal value; and the timing of net power cost benefits and
renewable energy credits ("RECs").
What is terminal value?
Termnal value is the value associated with the right to re-power a resource at cost
when the asset reaches the end of its initial economic life. Termnal value
includes all aspects of the resource, including its location, favorable land rights,
the existence of or favorable location to infrastructure, and other beneficial
attributes.
Does terminal value apply to each Wind Resource?
Yes. While the Company conservatively excluded termnal value in its
quantitative analysis of Seven Mile Hil, Glenrock, Rollng Hils, Seven Mile Hil
II and Glenrock III, an estimate of termnal value associated with the High Plains
Wind Resource can be seen in Table 3 of Confidential Exhibit No. 25 and an
estimate of termnal value associated with the McFadden Ridge I Wind Resource
can be seen in Table 3 of Confidential Exhibit No. 26.
Are there other qualitative factors associated with the Wind Resources?
Yes. The Seven Mile Hil II resource is located adjacent to the Seven Mile Hil
Tallman, Di - 10
Rocky Mountai Power
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 Q.
11 A.
12
13
14
15
16
17 Q.
18
19 A.
20 Q.
21 A.
22
23
resource and, as such, the Company is able to fuher utilze certin infrastructue
that was necessary for the Seven Mile Hil resource. Likewise, similar synergies
exist with the Rollng Hils and Glenrock III resources (being adjacent to the
Glenrock resource) and the McFadden Ridge I resource being adjacent to the
High Plains Wind Resource. This fuher utilzed infrastrcture includes
transmission interconnection substations (Freezeout, Windsta and Foote Creek)
as well as project transmission assets from High Plains to Foote Creek and from
Glenrock to Windsta. In addition, O&M buildings, land rights and roads are
furter utilized.
What independent benefit will the Windstar substation have?
In constrcting the Windstar substation, the Company was able to establish a key
point of interconnection that can be used for numerous other third pary requests
for interconnection (generation and other). In addition, theWindstar substation
now represents the key staring point in Wyoming for the Company's multibilion
dollar Energy Gateway transmission project that wil, among other things,
facilitate further integration of renewable and non-renewable resources.
Wil the Company receive production tax credits ("PTCs") and RECs from
each Wind Resource?
Yes.
Did the Company benefit from any Wyoming specific tax benefits?
Yes. The Company benefited from a Wyoming sales tax exemption for each
Wind Resource. The benefit was in the form of an avoided cost. The Wyoming
sales tax exemption sunsets December 31,2011.
Tallman, Di - 11
Rocky Mountain Power
1 Q.
2
3 A.
Has the Company obtained a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity
("CPCN") for each Wind Resurce?
Yes. The Company obtained a CPCN for each Wind Resource from the
4 Wyoming Public Service Commssion. Because each Wind Resource is in
5 Wyoming, application for a lie certificate in Idaho was not required.
6 Update for Most Recent Capacity Factor Projections
7 Q.
8
9
10 A.
11
12
13
14 Q.
15
16 A.
17
18
19
20
21
22
In completing the construction process, did the Company obtain third-party
technical studies updating the capacity factor estimates for each Wind
Resource?
Confidential Exhibit Nos. 27, 28, 29, 30 and 31 are the final build design energy
projections for the Seven Mile Hil, Glenrock, Rollng Hils, Seven Mile Hil II
and Glenrock III resources, respectively. A final build design energy projection
has yet to be completed for the High Plains and McFadden Ridge I resources.
Please summarize the final build design energy projections for these
resources.
The table below provides a summar of the final build design energy.projection
estimate ("FBDE") for each Wind Resource as well as the projection at the time
the decision was made to acquire the resource. The summar shows estimated
annual capacity factor ("CF") at the probability fifty (P50) level and megawatt-
hours ("MW"). Because actual CF is dependent on the weather and other
factors, a P50 estimate means that the actual production in any given year can be
expected to be higher or lower over the life of the resource.
Tallman, Di - 12
Rocky Mountain Power
1 Q.
2
3 A.
4
5 Q.
6 A.
7
8
9 Q.
10
11
12 A.
13
Wind ResourceFBDE
Acquisition Acquisition Updated Updated
Decision Decision wlFBDE wlFBDE
Resource (CF)(MWh)(CF)(MWh)
Seven Mile Hill 41.3%358,170 40.3%349,948
Glenrock 38.6%334,755 37.4%324,348
Rollng Hils 31.0%268,844 33.8%293,127
Seven Mile Hil II 39.3%67,132 40.3%68,840
Glenrock II 31.0%105,908 36.4%124,357
TotalMWh 1,134,810 1,160,170
Average CF 36.2%37.6%
High Plains 35.7%309,605 nla
McFadden Ridge I 34.5%86,133 nla
TotaMW 1,530,547 1,555,907
Average CF 35.9%36.9%
Is it unusual for capacity factor estimates to vary over time as the
construction of wind-powered generation facilities progress?
No. As more information is acquired, it is not unusual for capacity factor
estimates to be updated.
Why were the estimated capacity factors of these resources updted?
The update in.estimated capacity factor reflects normal changes that resulted in
the final construction design of the resources, as well as additional information on
wind climatology for the sites.
Is the average capacity factor of the Wind Resources in line with the average
capacity factor for the Company's Wyoming power purchase contracts with
wind-powered generation resources?
Yes. The average capacity factor for the Company's Wyoming power purchase
contracts with wind-powered generation resources is approximately 32.0 percent.
Tallman, Di - 13
Rocky Mountain Power
1 Q.
2
3
4 A.
5
6
7
8 Q.
9
10 A.
11
12
13
14 Q.
15 A.
16
17
18
19 Q.
20 A.
21
Is the average capacity factor predicted for the Wind Resources in line with
the proxy capacity factor assumed for Wyoming wind resources in the
Company's IRP?
Yes. The Company's 2007 IRP and 2008 IRP used a 35 percenë capacity factor
to model proxy wind projects for building the Company's portfolio of renewable
energy resources. In reality, some renewable resources wil have capacity factors
above 35 percent and others wil be lower than 35 percent.
Does the Company currently have wind resurces or contracts with wind
resources in its portfolio with capacity factors below 35 percent?
Yes, excluding any of the Wind Resources, the Company curently has 21 such
resources with projected annual capacity factors below 35 percent. These
resources are located inside and outside of Wyoming. See Confidential Exhibit
No. 32.
Does the net power cost study in this case include the FBDE?
Yes. The Company believes the most recent capacity factor projection is
appropriate to use for setting rates and, as such, the Company included ~e FBDE
updates in the net power cost study sponsored by Company witness Dr. Hui Shu
in this case.
Has the Company included the value of PTCs and RECs in its filing?
Yes. The value of PTCs, RECs or other known tax-related benefits and burdens
for each Wind Resourc are included in the Company's filng.
435% is in line with the proxy wind assumptions used in the 2004IRP.
Tallman, Di - 14
Rocky Mountan Power
1 Q.
2
3
4 A.
Did the Company acquire the Wind Resources for the purpose of complying
with renewable portfolio standards in Oregon, Washington, Calornia or to
meet the requirements of carbon reduction legislation in Utah?
No, each Wind Resource was acquired on the basis of its economics, other
5 quantitative factors and qualitative factors.
6 Conclusion
7 Q.
8 A.
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17 Q.
18 A.
19
20
21
22
23
What are the overall benefits of Wind Resources to Idaho customers?
Customers benefit from the Wind Resources because they represent cost effective
renewable resources. The 2004, 2007 and 2008 IRPs specify that cost effective
renewable resources (using wind-powered generation resources as a proxy)
should be steadily added to the system. The Wind Resources benefit customers as
their acquisitions were both cost effective and consistent with th~ Company's
robust long-term planning efforts though the IRP process. Customers furter
benefit from these renewable resources because they provide a zero incremental
cost fuel source, thus reducing exposure to potentially volatile commodity and/or
fuel risks.
Are there other benefits the Commission should consider?
Yes. The Wind Resources are multi-shafted generation resources that diversify
the impact of individual generator failures and provide the Company with
continued ownership and operational experience with utility-scale wind projects.
Each Wind Resource utilizes G .E. wind tubines, thus complementing the
Company's operating experience with other G.E. based projects, spare
optimization and procurement of O&M services.
Tallman, Di - 15
Rocky Mountan Power
1 Q.Was each Wind Resource acquired consistent with the Company's then-
2 current IRP and does it represnt the least cost/rik option available for the
3 long-term benefit of customers?
4 A.Yes
5 Q.Was each Wind Resource prudently acquired, in the public interest and is
6 each Wind Resource used and useful?
7 A.Yes
8 Q.Does this conclude your direct testimony?
9 A.Yes.
Tallman, Di - 16
Rocky Mountain Power
CONFIDENTIAL
Case No. PAC-E-1O-07
Exhbit No. 20
Witness: Mark R. Tallman
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER
CONFIDENTIAL
Exhibit Accompanying Direct Testimony of Mark R. Tallman
Seven Mile Hil
May 2010
THIS EXHIBIT IS CONFIDENTIAL
AND IS PROVIDED UNDER
SEPARATE COVER
CONFIDENTIAL
Case No. PAC-E-I0-07
Exhibit No. 21
Witness: Mark R. Tallman
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER
CONFIDENTIAL
Exhibit Accompanying Direct Testimony of Mark R. Tallman
Glenrock
May 2010
THIS EXHIBIT IS CONFIDENTIAL
AND IS PROVIDED UNDER
SEPARATE COVER
CONFIDENTIAL
Case No. PAC-E-IO-07
Exhibit No. 22
Witness: Mark R. Tallman
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER
CONFIDENTIAL
Exhibit Accompanying Direct Testimony of Mark R. Tallman
Rollng Hils
May 2010
THIS EXHIBIT IS CONFIDENTIAL
AND IS PROVIDED UNDER
SEPARA TECOVER
CONFIDENTIAL
Case No. PAC-E-I0-07
Exhibit No. 23
Witness: Mark R. Tallman
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER
CONFIDENTIAL
Exhibit Accompanying Direct Testimony of Mark R. Tallman
Seven Mile Hil (II)
May 2010
THIS EXHIBIT IS CONFIDENTIAL
AND IS PROVIDED UNDER
SEPARATE COVER
CONFIDENTIAL
Case No. PAC-E-1O-07
Exhibit No. 24
Witness: Mark R. Tallan
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER
CONFIDENTIAL
Exhibit Accompanying Direct Testimony of Mark R. Tallman
Glenrock III
May 2010
THIS EXHIBIT IS CONFIDENTIAL
AND IS PROVIDED UNDER
SEPARATE COVER
CONFIDENTIAL
Case No. PAC-E-1O-07
Exhibit No. 25
Witness: Mark R. Tallman
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER
CONFIDENTIAL
Exhibit Accompanying Direct Testimony of Mark R. Tallman
High Plains
May 2010
THIS EXHIBIT IS CONFIDENTIAL
AND IS PROVIDED UNDER
SEPARATE COVER
CONFIDENTIAL
Case No. PAC-E-1O-07
Exhibit No. 26
Witness: Mark R. Tallman
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER
CONFIDENTIAL
Exhibit Accompanying Direct Testimony of Mark R. Tallman
McFadden Ridge
May 2010
THIS EXHIBIT IS CONFIDENTIAL
AND IS PROVIDED UNDER
SEPARATE COVER
CONFIDENTIAL
Case No. PAC-E-1O-07
Exhibit No. 27
Witness: Mark R. Tallman
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER
CONFIDENTIAL
Exhibit Accompanying Direct Testimony of Mark R. Tallman
CH2MHil Technical Memorandum for Seven Mile Hil
May 2010
THIS EXHIBIT IS CONFIDENTIAL
AND IS PROVIDED UNDER
SEPARATE COVER
CONFIDENTIAL
Case No. PAC-E-I0-07
Exhibit No. 28
Witness: Mark R. Tallman
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER
CONFIDENTIAL
Exhibit Accompanying Direct Testimony of Mark R. Tallman
CH2MHil Technical Memorandum for Glenrock
May 2010
THIS EXHIBIT is CONFIDENTIAL
AND is PROVIDED UNDER
SEPARATE COVER
CONFIDENTIAL
Case No. PAC-E-I0-07
Exhibit No. 29
Witness: Mark R. Tallman
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER
CONFIDENTIAL
Exhibit Accompanying Direct Testimony of Mark R. Tallman
CH2MHil Technical Memorandum for Rollng Hils
May 2010
THIS EXHIBIT IS CONFIDENTIAL
AND IS PROVIDED UNDER
SEPARATE COVER
CONFIDENTIAL
Case No. PAC-E-I0-07
Exhibit No. 30
Witness: Mark R. Tallman
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER
CONFIDENTIAL
Exhibit Accompanying Direct Testimony of Mark R. Tallman
CH2MHil Technical Memorandum for Seven Mile Hil (II)
May 2010
THIS EXHIBIT IS CONFIDENTIAL
AND IS PROVIDED UNDER
SEPARATE COVER
CONFIDENTIAL
Case No. PAC-E-1O-07
Exhibit No. 31
Witness: Mark R. Tallman
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER
CONFIDENTIAL
Exhibit Accompanying Direct Testimony of Mark R. Tallman
CH2MHil Technical Memorandum for Glenrock III
May 2010
THIS EXHIBIT IS CONFIDENTIAL
AND IS PROVIDED UNDER
SEPARATE COVER
CONFIDENTIAL
Case No. PAC-E-I0-07
Exhibit No. 32
Witness: Mark R. Tallman
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER
CONFIDENTIAL
Exhibit Accompanying Direct Testimony of Mark R. Tallman
PP A Wind Capacity Factors
May 2010
THIS EXHIBIT IS CONFIDENTIAL
AND IS PROVIDED UNDER
SEPARATE COVER