20120626Comments on Reconsideration.pdf

NEIL PRICE
DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL
IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
P0 BOX 83720
BOISE, IDAHO 83720-0074
[phone]
IDAHO BAR NO. 6864
RECEVED
2U12JUH26 PM 2: 15
\H..T
UTLTES
Street Address for Express Mail:
472 W. WASHINGTON
BOISE, IDAHO 83702-5918
Attorney for the Commission Staff
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF
ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER FOR ) CASE NO. PAC-E-12-03
AUTHORITY TO INCREASE RATES )
THROUGH THE ENERGY COST )
ADJUSTMENT MECHANISM (ECAM) ) STAFF COMMENTS ON
) RECONSIDERATION
)
COMES NOW the Staff of the Idaho Public Utilities Commission, by and through its
Attorney of record, Neil Price, Deputy Attorney General, and in response to Reconsideration
Order No. 32554 issued on May 18, 2012, submits the following comments.
BACKGROUND
On February 1, 2012, PacifiCorp dba Rocky Mountain Power ("Rocky Mountain", RMP
or "Company") submitted its annual Energy Cost Adjustment Mechanism ("ECAM") filing in
accordance with Idaho Code §§ 61-502 and 61-503, and Rule 52.
On March 30, 2012, the Commission issued final Order No. 32507 approving Rocky
Mountain Power's ECAM Application with certain adjustments. On April 20, 2012, Monsanto
Company ("Monsanto") filed a Petition for Reconsideration of Final Order No. 32507.
On May 18, 2012, the Commission issued Reconsideration Order No. 32554 granting
COMMENTS ON RECONSIDERATION 1 JUNE 26, 2012
in part, and denying in part, Monsanto's Petition for Reconsideration. In the Order, the
Commission directed the parties to participate in a public workshop to discuss and develop
recommendations regarding: (1) the appropriate load split percentage (normalized and actual)
for Monsanto, Agrium and the Company's remaining tariff customers; (2) the proper
apportionment and attribution of "line losses" occurring on Rocky Mountain's Idaho system to
specific customer groups; and (3) scheduling of Rocky Mountain's future ECAM filings. Order
No. 32554 at 9.
STAFF COMMENTS
Overview
Monsanto's Petition for Reconsideration requested that the Commission address three
issues as a result of Final Commission Order No. 32507. First, Monsanto believed the
percentage split of monthly jurisdictional base loads among customer groups were not accurately
or correctly established due to the application of improper transmission line losses. This together
with improper adjustments to actual load resulted in an unfair allocation of ECAM related cost to
Monsanto. Second, Monsanto believed that the Company's generation plants experienced forced
outages that were excessive when compared to the industrial average and were not prudent.
Finally, Monsanto believed that "the compressed modified procedure schedule imposed a heavy
burden and unreasonable constraint on Monsanto's ability to conduct discovery and thoroughly
review and carefully analyze the ECAM filing." Monsanto has requested a different procedure
and expanded time frame for future ECAM filings.
As stated above, in Reconsideration Order No. 32554, the Commission ordered a
workshop to address the following issues: (1) the appropriate load split percentage (normalized
and actual) for Monsanto, Agrium and the Company's remaining tariff customers; (2) the proper
apportionment and attribution of 'line losses' occurring on Rocky Mountain Power's Idaho
system to specific customer groups; and (3) determination of schedules and procedures for future
RIVIP ECAM filings. The Commission denied reconsideration on the "forced outage" issue
because it was not part of the evidentiary record in the original case. Staff convened a workshop
on June 4, 2012. Monsanto, Rocky Mountain Power, and Commission Staff were all
represented.
Staff's analysis and proposed solution for addressing the appropriate allocation of base
load for Monsanto, Agrium and the Company's remaining tariff customers is included in the
COMMENTS ON RECONSIDERATION 2 JUNE 26, 2012
Normalized Base LoadAllocation section of these comments. Central to this issue is the proper
apportionment and attribution of line losses. It also addresses assumptions regarding Monsanto
replacement energy and how base load was determined in the general rate case. The Actual Load
Allocation section discusses the appropriate allocation of actual load for Monsanto, Agrium and
the Company's remaining tariff customers. Finally, the determination of procedures and time-
frames for future ECAM filings is discussed in the Scheduling section.
The calculation for determining the deferred cost using Staff's overall proposal is
included as Attachment A. It reflects a total deferred cost of $17,709,945 ($6,783,223 for
Monsanto, $469,272 for Agrium, and $10,457,450 for remaining tariff customers (without
interest) over the deferral period. The change in deferred cost comparing Staff's proposal to the
deferred cost in Commission Order No. 32507 is illustrated in the table below:
Delta Summary Table comparing Final ECAM Filing with Staff Proposal
Tariff
Customers Monsanto Agrium Total
NPC differential for Deferral (239,694) 213,663 17,213 (8,818)
LGARILCAR 453,140 (632,509) (63,079) (242,448)
502 / EITF-06 Adjustment (2,125) 1,529 132 (464)
(251,730) Total 211,320 (417,316) (45,734)
Customer Sharing % 90% 90% 90% 90%
Customer Responsibility 190,188 (375,585) (41,160) (226,557)
Renewable Resource Adder (7,135) - - (7,135)
REC Deferral (1,587) 2,450 248 1,112
Total Company NPC Deferral (w/o interest) 181,466 (373,135) (40,912) (232,581)
Interest 1,772 (3,015) (289) (1,532)
Total Company NPC Deferral (WI interest) 183,237 (376,149) (41,201) (234,113)
Normalized Base Load Allocation
In its Petition for Reconsideration, Monsanto raised two issues that relate to the proper
allocation of normalized base load. First, Monsanto believed the Idaho monthly base load
amount was improperly split among the three relevant classes due to the use of improper line loss
adjustment factors. Second, Monsanto believed that replacement energy needs to be removed
from base load amounts. After gathering information, conducting the workshop, and performing
an analysis, Staff arrived at the following conclusions:
1. The ECAM used an improper transmission line loss adjustment factor that understated
Monsanto and Agrium's base load allocation and recommends using the class cost of
service loads as a surrogate for allocation purposes;
COMMENTS ON RECONSIDERATION 3 JUNE 26, 2012
2. It is improper and unnecessary to remove Monsanto replacement energy from base load
figures included in Monsanto's original ECAM filing.
Each of these conclusions is discussed in detail in the following two sections. The
calculation for these recommendations using Staff's methodology is included as Attachment B.
The resulting change to base load over the ECAM test year from the base load used in
Commission Order No. 32507 is illustrated in the table below.
Proposed Change for Final
Base Load (MWh) Staffs Commission Difference
Order Proposal
Monsanto 1,351,296 1,354,328 3,032
Agrium 102,138 99,176 -2,962
Remaining Tariff Customers 2,093,340 2,080,628 -12,712
Total 3,546,774 3,534,132 -12,642
Line Losses
The proper apportionment and attribution of 'line losses' occurring on Rocky Mountain
Power's Idaho system for specific customer groups is highly inter-related with load allocation
issues. In fact, the primary problem with determining an accurate base load allocation is due to
the nonexistence of a jurisdictional load allocation by customer class used to determine revenue
requirements in the relevant general rate cases. This required RMP to develop an allocation
method outside of rate cases for the purposes of the ECAM.
In its ECAM filing, RMP used a "system" line loss adjustment factor of approximately
9.9% for special contract customers, Monsanto and Agrium. This is almost 3 times larger than
the transmission line loss adjustment factor approved in the last general rate case, 3.605%, used
to calculate load at generation for large industrial customers for class cost of service purposes.
Large industrial customers, such as Monsanto and Agrium, have significantly lower line losses
due to their direct connection with transmission lines that convey electricity at higher more
efficient voltages. This is in contrast with remaining tariff customers who are connected to
distribution lines that move power less efficiently at much lower voltages requiring relatively
more load at generation to compensate. Staff agrees with Monsanto that by using a "system"
line loss adjustment factor which essentially averages line losses for all customers across RMP's
COMMENTS ON RECONSIDERATION 4 JUNE 26, 2012
system instead of a transmission line loss factor, the allocation of ECAM cost-causing load for
the normalized base in the Company's filing is overstated for both Agrium and Monsanto.
Because a "jurisdictional" class allocation of base load does not exist, Staff developed a
method of allocation using the "class" allocation of loads used for cost-of-service purposes as a
surrogate. This allocation exists in the relevant rate cases and uses appropriate lines losses for
each different customer class. However, when summed across all customer classes, the
allocation does not equal the total jurisdictional base load used to determine revenue
requirements. According to the Company, the difference between the two load figures is
attributed to losses from moving wholesale energy sales.' By calculating the ratio of the total
class allocation load by the total jurisdictional load, this factor can be applied to Monsanto and
Agrium's class allocation load so that the total load across all customer classes equals the load
used to determine revenue requirements. This will ensure a full accounting of load used to
establish rates and an accurate basis to compare against actual load for the calculation of ECAM
related deferred costs. This approach complies with Commission Order No. 32507 that
maintains that base load established in a general rate case and embedded in base rates should not
be changed in the ECAM.
Replacement Energy in Base Load
In its Petition for Reconsideration, Monsanto claimed that monthly base load amounts
must have replacement energy removed since those sales are not a component of the ECAM.2
Replacement energy is power that Monsanto buys-through at market rates when it needs energy
to operate its facilities and is an option available to Monsanto when the Company decides to
exercise a contract provision that allows it to "economically" curtail Monsanto load. However,
Staff believes the Company's position, that the amount included in base load is assumed to be
served without curtailment, is correctly supported by Appendix D of the 2010 Jurisdictional
Protocol. Although the test year for the rate cases relevant to the ECAM experienced Monsanto
replacement energy, the Company assumed these loads would be served without curtailment for
the purpose of developing revenue requirements. Because the cost to serve these loads was
included in revenue requirement, any adjustment to base load for replacement energy in the
ECAM would be improper. However, Staff recognizes adjustments to actual load reflecting
'See Case No. PAC-E- 10-07, McDougal Rebuttal, page 41.
2 See Monsanto Petition for Reconsideration, Kathryn Iverson, DI, page 4.
COMMENTS ON RECONSIDERATION 5 JUNE 26, 2012
curtailment of Monsanto load may be necessary to ensure that the ECAM collects the appropriate
power supply expenses from the proper customer group.
Actual Load Allocation
Although Staff believes that total load used to develop base rates should not be changed
in this ECAM, Staff agrees that actual loads should be adjusted to assure that power supply costs
are properly recovered by the Company and allocated to the appropriate customer group. The
purpose of the ECAM is to compensate the Company or reimburse customers when actual net
power costs differ from those established in a general rate case. Staff believes there are two
additional adjustments that are appropriate in the current ECAM.
1.Monsanto and Agrium actual loads at generation need to be adjusted for losses associated
with moving wholesale energy sales so they are comparable to Staff's method of
customer allocated base loads at generation.
2.Monsanto and total retail actual loads need to be adjusted for "economic" curtailment
related energy so that the Company doesn't double recover energy-related fixed costs in
the Load Change Adjustment (LCAR) mechanism.
Each of these recommendations is discussed in detail in the following two sections. The
resulting yearly change to actual load for net power cost and LCAR purposes from the base load
used in Commission Order No. 32507 is illustrated in the table below.
Actual Load for Net Power Cost Actual Load for Load Change Adjustment
Proposed Change for Actual
Load (MWh) Final Staffs Proposal Commission Difference Final Staffs Proposal Commission Difference
Order Order
Monsanto 1,334,211 1,374,199 39,988 1,334,211 1,390,165 55,954
Agrium 103,599 106,812 3,213 103,599 106,812 3,213
Remaining Tariff Customers 2,096,791 2,049,119 -47,672 2,096,791 2,049,119 -47,672
Total 3,534,601 3,530,129 -4,472 3,534,601 3,546,096 11,495
Wholesale Energy Sales Loss Adjustment
As explained earlier, Staff's proposal is to resolve the base load allocation by using the
class allocation load as a surrogate while applying a monthly wholesale energy sales loss
COMMENTS ON RECONSIDERATION 6 JUNE 26, 2012
adjustment factor to each customer class' base load. Because these losses were incorporated into
the base load (at generation), the same monthly wholesale energy sales loss adjustment factors
need to be applied to both Monsanto and Agrium's loads which were measured at the customer's
meter. Staff believes this is necessary to ensure an actual load at generation that compares
'apples-to-apples' to Staffs calculated base load allocation also at the point of generation. In
addition, the wholesale energy sales loss adjustment factor needs to be appropriately applied to
actual Monsanto replacement (for net power cost) and curtailment (for LCAR) loads so that it
accurately reflects load impact at generation. Attachments C and D contain Staff's calculations
for the allocation of actual load incorporating this adjustment.
Economic Curtailment Adjustment
Monsanto and RMP have a contract that allows the Company to choose to curtail
Monsanto load if the Company believes that it is in their economic interest to do so. This type of
curtailment, labeled as "economic curtailment," is not to be confused with mandatory curtailment
implemented to maintain electricity system reliability. RIVIP has purchased economic
curtailment rights by paying Monsanto a fixed amount of money in exchange for a fixed amount
of load curtailment. In the Company's filing and in the Commission's Final Order No. 32507,
RMP is currently able to recover energy-related fixed cost of load economically curtailed
through the Load Change Adjustment (LCAR) portion of the ECAM. Staff believes including
Monsanto's economically curtailed load in total actual load and in Monsanto's portion of total
actual load will allow RMP "double recovery" of energy-related fixed costs associated with load
that is economically curtailed.
Monsanto states that all curtailed loads, including economic and reliability-related
curtailment, should be excluded from LCAR related recovery. However, Staff maintains that
reliability-related curtailment is not something the Company chooses. It is a system requirement
and a normal cost of doing business which is part of the Company's mandate as a public utility to
serve. Therefore, Staff believes that the Company should receive recovery of energy-related
fixed cost for curtailed loads associated with system reliability.
The choice to economically curtail is the Company's decision. Although the Company
pays for this right, this is a sunk cost embedded in rates. Because it is the Company's decision,
RMP can evaluate its choice to curtail based on all economic information at its disposal
including: the contract price Monsanto would pay for the energy if the Company decides not to
COMMENTS ON RECONSIDERATION 7 JUNE 26, 2012
curtail; the current market price of energy the Company would receive if it sold curtailed energy
in the open electricity market; and the fixed and variable cost of producing the electricity. It can
also incorporate ECAM-related impacts in its decision including customer sharing.
As a result of the Company's curtailment decision, Monsanto can react in one of two
ways: (1) allow RMP to interrupt its energy supply, or (2) Monsanto can "buy-through."
Buying-through allows Monsanto to receive replacement energy from RMP for energy the
Company curtails, but must purchase the energy essentially at market price rather than its usual
negotiated contract price.
If Monsanto is curtailed, Staff believes the Company will either sell the generation at a
higher price than Monsanto would have paid or it will avoid a more expensive energy purchase.
Either way, the Company will more than recover the fixed cost associated with the curtailed
energy. The ability of RMP to fully recover the fixed energy costs associated with economic
curtailment without LCAR recovery forms the basis of Staff's proposed adjustment.
Staff calculated a separate actual load allocation for determining LCAR related costs that
includes Monsanto economic curtailment so that double-recovery of energy-related fixed costs
can be avoided. The adjustment requires that all actual economic curtailment, including
Monsanto buy-through energy (replacement energy) and actual interruption, is included in both
Monsanto and total Idaho actual loads (both appropriately adjusted as if measured at generation).
Staff's calculation for LCAR adjusted actual load is equal to actual retail sales load plus load that
was economically curtailed. Attachment D contains Staff's calculations for the allocation of
actual load incorporating this adjustment.
Scheduling
In order to address Monsanto's concerns related to the lack of time for Monsanto to
conduct discovery and thoroughly review and carefully analyze the ECAM filing, the Company
has agreed to provide prospective interveners, the same quarterly ECAM deferral reports
currently distributed to the Commission. This will allow more time and opportunity to ask
questions and receive responses from the Company prior to the filing. In addition, the Company
has agreed to develop a comprehensive confidentiality agreement that would cover the
distribution of the quarterly ECAM deferral reports and other ECAM relevant information from
the Company that would help intervening parties expedite the discovery process.
COMMENTS ON RECONSIDERATION 8 JUNE 26, 2012
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff has received confirmation that the Company has accepted Staff's proposal for
calculating deferred cost for the ECAM. Staff believes that Monsanto has also accepted Staff's
proposal. Based on the general acceptance by both parties of Staff's proposed methodology,
Staff makes the following recommendations on reconsideration:
1.Use Staff's method for calculating and allocating normalized and actual load for
Monsanto, Agrium, and the Company's remaining tariff customers for future ECAM's.
2.Accept and approve for recovery Staff's adjusted Idaho ECAM deferred cost of
$6,783,223 for Monsanto, $469,272 for Agrium, and $10,457,450 for remaining tariff
customers for a total balance of $17,709,945 for the December 1, 2010 through
November 30, 2011 deferral period (does not include previously approved 2nd year
amortization from last year's Load Change Adjustment).
3.Continue all customer rates, including Schedule 400 and 401, as recently approved in
Commission Order No. 32507.
4.Direct the Company to develop a comprehensive confidentiality agreement that would
cover the distribution of quarterly ECAM deferral reports and any other ECAM relevant
information that would allow intervening parties to expedite the discovery process.
5.Direct the Company to provide the same quarterly ECAM deferral reports currently
distributed to the Commission to any potential intervening party that signs the
confidentiality agreement.
Respectfully submitted this day of June 2012.
Nei(k?
Deputy Attorney General
Technical Staff: Mike Louis
Keith Hessing
i:/umisc/comments/pace 1 2.3npmlkh public workshop comments
COMMENTS ON RECONSIDERATION 9 JUNE 26, 2012
Idaho ECAM Deferral
Staff Scenario 18:
I. ECAM Final order
2.Class Cost of Service as Allocation Surrogate
3.Monsanto Replacement removed from Actual Load for NPC
4.Actual Load Adjusted for Monsanto Economic Curtailment for LCA
December 2010 through November 2011
Line
No.
I Base NPC Rate ($/MWO) - See (1) below
A Wind Integration Cost ($/MWS) See PR response to Monsanto
B Third Party Wind sold to Wholesale (MWh) See PR response to Monsanto
C Adjustment to NPC for Liquidated Damages See Monsanto Table 5 NPC
0 Total Company Adjusted Actual NPC w/ $2.9 tfMWh = Line 2- (Line As Line B) - C
2 Total Company Adjusted Actual NPC ($)
3 Actual Retail Load (MWh)
4 Actual NPC ($/MWh) = Line 2! Line 3
5 NPC Differential $/MWh = Line 4- Line 1
O Actual Tariff Customer Load for NPC Deferral
7 Actual Monsanto Load for NPC Deferral
8 Actual Annum Load for NPC Deferral
9 Actual Idaho Load (MW9) for NPC Deferral
10 Tariff Customer NPC for Deferral = Line * Line 6
11 Monsanto NPC for Deferral = Lines * Line 7
12 Aorium NPC for Deferral = Line 5 * Line 8
13 Total NPC Differential for Deferral (5)
14 Tariff Customer Base Load for LCA
15 Monsanto Base Load for LCA
16 Atrium Base Load for LCA
17 Total Base Load for LCA
18 Actual Tariff Customer Load for LCA
19 Actual Monsanto Load for LCA
20 Actual Atrium Load for LCA
21 Actual Idaho Load (MWh) for LCA
22 Tariff Customer Load Differential = Line 18- Line 14
23 Monsanto Base Load Differential = Line 19- Line 15
24 Aorium Base Load Differential = Line 20- Line 16
25 Difference Base Load to Actual Load
26 Load Change Adjustment Rate (LCAR) ($/MWH) (2)
27 Tariff Customer LCA = -Line 22 x Line 26
28 Monsanto Base LCA = -Line 23 x Line 26
29 Agrium Base LC A = -Line 24x Line 26
30 Load Change Adjustment Revenues
31 S02 Allowances Sales
32 Idaho SE Factor
33 Idaho Allocated S02 Allowance Sales = Line 31 x Line 32
34 Idaho Allocated EITF 04-6 Deferral Adiustment
35 Total Adjustments
36 Tariff Customer - ID Load %
37 Monsanto - ID Load %
38 Agnum - IDLoad%
39 Tariff Customer Adjustments = Line 35x Line 36
40 Monsanto Adjustments = Line 35 x Line 37
41 Atrium Adiustments = Line 35 x Line 38
42 Total Adjustments
43 Tariff Customer NPC Differential + LCA + S02 + BIT = Sum of Lines 10, 27, 39
44 Monsanto NPC Differential + LCA + S02 + BITF = Sam of Lines 11.28.40
45 Annum NPC Differential + LCA + S02 + EITF = Sum of Lines 12,29,41
46 Total NPC Differential + LCA + S02 • EITF
47 Customer / Company Sharing ratio
48 Tariff Customer NPC Differential + LCA + S02. I = Line 43x Line 47
49 Monsanto NPC Differential + LCA . S02 • EITF C = Line 44 x Line 47
50 Atrium NPC Differential a LCA , S02 a EITF Deft= Line 45x Line 47
51 Customer! Company Sharing (90110)
Attachment A
Case No. PAC-E-12-03
Staff Comments
06/26/12 Page 1 of
Staff Dec-10 Jan-11 Feb-11 Mar-Il Apr-11 May-Il Jun.11 Jul-11 Aug-11 Sep-11 Oct.11 Nov.11 Proposal
Total 16.93 14.76 14.63 15.38 16.64 17.06 17.31 21.60 22.89 20.75 17.28 17.77
2.98 2.98 2.98 2.98 2.98 2.98 2.98 2.98 2.98 2.98 2.98 2.98
98.177 102,447 107,859 124,611 116,749 93,829 94,310 53,981 65,833 56,907 74,486 90,106
95,464,450 107,096,407 101,886,160 99,136,337 95,687,984 96,647,928 103,343,300 140,484,298 147,599,913 122.814,885 109,843,436 120,978,255
95,757,018 107.401,699 102,209,579 99,507,678 96,035,896 96,927,539 103,824,344 140,645,161 147,796,095 122,984,469 110.065,405 121,246,771 1,344,201.655
5,261,325 5,299,026 4,692,843 4,802,154 4,531,018 4,505,487 4,632,662 5,367,046 5,321,022 4.680,341 4,621,700 4,859,771 58,654,395 18.14 20.21 21.71 20.31 21.12 21.45 22.31 26.18 27.74 26.24 23.77 24.89
1.21 5.45 7.08 4.93 4.48 4.40 4.99 4.58 4.85 5.49 6.49 7.12
149,388 157,160 141,779 127,686 120,571 139,776 220.314 354,616 210,804 172,424 120,054 134,548 2.049.119
132.746 100,154 135,859 128,392 130,658 127,914 132,826 126,169 95,451 134,042 120,987 1,374,199
10,973 9,473 11,145 10,498 10.267 4,859 9,480 9,744 9,817 10,661 9,896 106,812 149.388 300,879 260,406 274.689 259.461 280,701 353,088 496.921 346,717 277.691 264.757 265,431 3,530,129
180,797 857,129 1,004,324 628,950 539,940 614,360 1,100,110 1,623,772 1,021,533 947,324 779,273 958,514 10,256,033
723,981 773,220 669,206 574,965 574,291 638,725 608,203 611,403 524,421 070,068 861,908 7,430,390
59,844 67,107 54,895 47,010 45,126 24,264 43,407 47,218 53,935 69,203 70,496 582,506
180.797 1,640,953 1,844,651 1.353,052 1,161,915 1,233,784 1,763,098 2,275.382 1.680,164 1,525.680 1.718.544 1.890,919 18,268,929
162,409 149,438 126,296 135,418 132,351 183,171 234,654 286.693 242,627 181,692 134,427 131,452 2,080,628
134,216 111,297 124,401 121,177 122,604 119,484 124,679 125,027 121,839 125,420 124.184 1,354,328 10,012 8,803 9,335 9.087 9,194 7,309 8,982 9,005 9,055 9,308 9,086 99,176 162,409 293,666 246,395 269.155 262,615 314,969 361,447 420,354 376,659 292.587 269,155 264.722 3.534.132
149,388 157,180 141,779 127,686 120,571 139,776 220,314 354,616 210,804 172,424 120,054 134,548 2,049,119
132,746 109,154 135,859 128.392 130,658 127,914 132,826 126,169 95,451 139,838 131,158 1,390,165
10,973 9,473 11,145 10,498 10,267 4,859 9.480 9,744 9,817 10,661 9,896 106,812
149,388 300,879 260,406 274,689 259,461 280,701 353.088 496,921 340,717 277,691 270,554 275,602 3.546.096
(13,022) 7,722 15,483 (7,732) (11,780) (43,395) (14,340) 67,923 (31,823) 10,731 (14,373) 3.096 (31,510) - (1,470) (2,143) 11,457 7,216 8,054 8,431 8,147 1,142 (26,389) 14.418 6,974 35,837 - 961 671 1,809 1,411 1,073 (2,450) 498 739 762 1,353 809 7,636
(13.022) 7,213 14,011 5,535 (3,154) (34,268) (8,359) 76.567 (29.941) (14,896) 1.398 10,879 11.963
18.05 21.89 21.89 21.89 5.47 5.47 5.47 5.47 5.47 5.47 5.47 5.47
235,008 (169,032) (338,926) 169,248 64,438 237,370 78,440 (371,537) 174,071 (58,700) 78,620 (16,935) 82,065
32,178 46,901 (250,800) (39,469) (44.054) (46,116) (44,563) (6246) 144,345 (76,866) (38.147) (324,837) (21,039) (14,681) (39,601) (7,717) (5,869) 13,402 (2,724) (4,045) (4,166) (7,404) (4,426) (98,269) 235,008 (157,893) (306,706) (121,154) 17,252 187,446 45,726 (418.824) 163,780 81.479 (7,649) (59,509) (341,042)
- - ($78,000) ($41,737) ($4,505) $0 ($40,509) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 (164,750)
6.5570% 6.3575% 6.3575% 6.3575% 6.3575% 6.3575% 6.3575% 6.3575% 6.3575% 6.3575% 6.3575% 6.3575% _____________ - - (4,959) (2,653) (286) - (2,575) - - - - - (10,474)
33,727 (11,997) (20,948) (11,103) (50,550) (33,494) (33248) 47,975 31,771 46,838 78,031 30,412 107,414
33,727 (11,997) (25,906) (13,756) (50,836) (33,494) (35,824) 47,975 31,771 46,839 78,031 30,412 96,940
53.21% 5223% 54.45% 46.48% 46.47% 49.80% 62.40% 71.36% 60.80% 62.09% 45.34% 50.69%
44.12% 41.92% 49.46% 49.48% 46.55% 36.23% 26.73% 36.39% 34.37% 50.63% 45.58%
3.65% 3.64% 4.06% 4.05% 3.66% 1.38% 1.91% 2.81% 3.54% 4.03% 3.73%
17,946 (6,266) (14.105) (6,394) (23,623) (16.678) (22,353) 34,236 19,317 29.082 35,383 15,416 61,960
(5,293) (10,859) (6,804) (25,156) (15,590) (12,978) 12,824 11,561 16,099 39,506 13,862 17,172
(438) (942) (558) (2,057) (1,225) (493) 915 893 1,656 3,142 1,134 2,027
17,946 (11,997) (25.906) (13.756) (50,836) (33,494) (35,824) 47,975 31,771 46,838 78.031 30,412 81,159
433,751 681,830 651,293 791,804 580,755 835,059 1,156,197 1,286,470 1,214,921 917,707 893,277 956,995 10,400,057 - 750,866 809,262 411,602 510,340 514,646 579,631 576,464 616,718 684,866 830,708 837,623 7,122,725 - 38,367 51,484 14,736 37,237 38,031 37,173 41,599 44,066 51,424 64,942 67,204 486.264
433,751 1,471,063 1.512.039 1.218,142 1,128,331 1.387.736 1,773,001 1,904,533 1,875,705 1,653.997 1,788,926 1.861,822 18,009,046
90.0% 90.0% 90.0% 90.0% 90.0% 90.0% 90.0% 90.0% 90.0% 90.0% 90.0% 90.0%
390,376 613,647 586,164 712,623 522,679 751,553 1,040,577 1,157,823 1,093,429 825,936 803,949 861,296 9,360,052 - 675,779 728,335 370.442 459,306 463,181 521,668 518,818 555,046 616,379 747,637 753,861 6,410,452 - 34,531 46,336 13,262 33,513 34,228 33,456 37,439 39,660 46,282 58,448 60,483 437,637 390,376 1.323.957 1,360,835 1,096,328 1,015,498 1,248,963 1,595,701 1.714.080 1,688,134 1.488,597 1,610,034 1,675,640 16,208,141
Deferred Coat
Only
Total
Staff Scenario IB:
1.ECAM Final order
2.Class Cost of Service as Allocation Surrogate
3.Monsanto Replacement removed from Actual Load for NPC
4.Actual Load Adjusted for Monsanto Economic Curtailment for LCA
December 2010 through November 2011
Line
No.
52 Renewables Generation (MWhs)
53 Renewable Adder Rate per MWh
54 Total Renewable Resources Adder = Line 52x Line 53
55 Idaho SG Factor
56 Idaho Allocation = Line 54 x Line 55
57 Idaho Tariff Customers Percent
58 Renewable Resources Adder = Line 56 x Line 57
59 Idaho Actual Renewable Energy Credit Revenues 1$)
60 Idaho Base Renewable Enemy Credit Revenues 1St
61 REC Revenue Adjustment ($) = Line 59- Line 60
62 Tariff Customer REC Revenue Adjustment = Line 36x Line 61
63 Monsanto REC Revenue Adjustment = Line 370 Line 61
64 Aorium REC Revenue Adjustment = Line 380 Line 61
65 Total REC Revenue Adjustment ($)
66 Interest Rate
67 Tariff Customer Balancing Account ($)
68 Beginning Balance Excluding Unamortized LGA
69 Unamortized 2010 Load Growth Adjustment
69 Incremental Deferral = Line 48
70 Renewable Resources Adder = Line 58
71 REC Revenue Adjustment = Line 62
72 Less: Monthly ECAM Rider Revenues
73 Interest 74 Tariff Customer Ending Balance(s)
75 Monsanto Balancing Account (5)
76 Beginning Balance
77 Incremental Deferral = Line 49
78 REC Revenue Adjustment = Line 63
79 Less: Monthly ECAM Rider Revenues
80 Interest
81 Monsanto Ending Balance (5)
82 Agrlum Balancing Account ($)
83 Beginning Balance
84 Incremental Deferral = Line 50
85 REC Revenue Adjustment = Line 64
86 Less: Monthly SCAM Rider Revenues
87 Interest
88 Agrlum Ending Balance ($)
89 Total ECAM Deferral Balance = Sum of Lines 74, 81, 88
St,.ff flfrrd (nt
Dec-10 Jan-11 Feb-Il Mar-Il Apr-Il May-Il Jun-11 Jul-il Aug-Il Sep-11 Oct-11i Nov-11 Proposal Only I
Total Total
155,931
$55.00
8,576,210
6.0479%
518,681
53.21%
275,989 275,989
(156,409) (383,764) (476,676) (702,633) (649,126) (705,294) (578,135) (81,049) (96,023) (182,551) (671,459) (649,714) (5,332,833)
(75,604) (585,930) (585,930) (585,930) (585,930) (585,930) (585,930) (585,930) (585,930) (585,930) (585,930) (585,930' (6,520,839)
(80,805) 202,186 109,255 (116.702) (63,195) (119,363) 7,795 504,882 489,907 403,379 (85,529) (63,764) 1,188,006
(42,996) 105,599 59,484 (54,248) (29,367) (59,437) 4,864 360,297 297,863 250,466 (38,783) (32,332) 821,409
89,195 45,796 (57,720) (31,272) (55,560) 2,824 134,953 178,276 138,653 (43,302) (29,073) 372,771
7,373 3,975 (4,735) (2,557) (4,368) 107 9,632 13,768 14,260 (3,444) (2,378) 31,635
(42,996) 202,166 109,255 (116.702) (63,195) (119,363) 7,795 504,882 489,907 403,379 (85,529) (63j84) 1225.815
1.00% 1.00% 1.00% 1.00% 1.00% 1.00% 1.00% 1.00% 1.00% 1.00% 1.00% 1.00%
11,181,331 11,679.015 12266,572 12,793,579 13,343,671 13,527,217 13,533,271 13,751,771 13.710.329 13,724,445 13,755,558 13,798,566 157,065,327
2.378,721 2,378.721 2.378.721 2,378,721 2,378,721 2,378.721 2,378,721 2,378,721 2,378.721 2,378.721 2.378,721 2,378,721 28,544648
390,376 613,647 586,164 712,623 522,679 751,553 1,040,577 1,157,823 1,093,429 825,936 803,949 861,296 9,360,052
275,989 . . . - . . . 275,989
(42,996) 105,599 59,484 (54,248) (29,367) (59,437) 4,864 360,297 297,863 250,466 (38,783) (32,332) 821,409 10,457,450
(137,186) (143,643) (131,060) (121,152) (322,939) (699,313) (840,287) (1,572,981) (1,390,584) (1,058,715) (735,618) (667,582) (7,821,058)
11,503 11,955 12,419 12,867 13,173 13,252 13,345 13,419 13,408 13,427 13,458 13,548 155.773
14,057,736 14,645,293 15,172,300 15,722,392 15,905,938 15,911,992 16,130,492 16,089,050 16,103,166 16,134,279 16,177,287 16,352,216 16,352,216
- 765,292 1,540,384 1,854,520 2,284,278 2,693,973 3,220920 3,877,656 4,614,515 5,373,707 6,082,814 32,308068
675,779 728,335 370,442 459,306 463,181 521,668 518,818 555,046 616,379 747,637 753,861 6,410,452
89,195 45,796 (57,720) (31272) (55,560) 2,824 134,953 178,276 138,653 (43,302) (29,073) 372,771
- 6,783,223
319 960 1,414 1,724 2,073 2,464 2,957 3,537 4,160 4,772 5,371 29,750
765,292 1.549.384 1,854,520 2,284,278 2,693.973 3220,928 3,877.656 4,614,515 5,373,707 6,082,814 6,812,973 6,812,973
- 41,921 92,287 100,895 131,948 161,933 195,646 242,899 296,551 357,365 412,690 2,034,135
34,531 46,336 13,262 33,513 34,228 33,456 37,439 39,660 46,282 58,448 60,483 437,637 - - 7,373 3,975 (4,735) (2,557) (4,366) 107 9.632 13.768 14,260 (3,444) (2,378) 31,835
- 469,27211 17 56 80 97 122 149 183 225 272 321 368 1,891
41,921 92,287 100,895 131,948 161,933 195,646 242,899 296,551 357,365 412,690 471,163 471,163
14.051,736 15,452,506 16,894,971 17,677.807 18,322,164 18,767,898 19,547,066 20,209,605 21.014.232 21,865,352 22,672,791 23.636,352 M 23,636,352 17,709.945
(I) Base NPC Rate and Load from Case No. PAC-E-08-07 $982 million through 1212712010, from Case No. PAC-E-1 1-07 $1,024.8 million since 12/28/2010
(2) Represents Load Growth Adjustment in months December 10- March 11, then revised to Load Change Adjustment beginning in April 2011.
a-. 2
p
ID
t'J
o * h t'_)
Idaho Base Load by Month
Base loads from Case No PAC-B-08-07. and PAC-E-10-07

PAC-E-08-07 PAC-E-10-07
Dec-08 Dec-10 Jan-10 Feb-10 Mar-10 Apr-10 May-10 Jun-10 Jul-ID Aug-10 Sep-10 Oct-10 Nov-10 Total *
Jurisdictional Allocation Idaho Base Load (used to determine Rev. Rgmts.)
idaho Load © tatumedadj4tWtds ea(es
Class Allocation Idaho Base Load
Idaho Load @ Input (assumed ad). for line loss only & includes Monsanto Replacement) 277,800 278,883 287,186 246,498 253,901 254.510 301,702 358,626 412,144 368,372 284,554 254,653 256,565
Monsanto ReIacement ) Input )adj for line loss onI - - - - - - - - - - - -
04Uo L94d l )nput 1)Qot QAfluon dj forltne toI 0
Idaho
Monsanto Total Load ( Input (Class Allocalion - Coat of Sales) 108,503 119,697 131,255 111.343 117,351 117,437 117 440 118,651 122,244 122,277 118,494 118,662 120,357
- -5 -
Austed Monsanto Load at Input 112.176 120,461 134,216 111,297 124,401 121,177 122,604 119,484 124,679 125,021 121,839 125,420 124,184
Monsanto Replacement tl Input (with wh0ee Fackx In. loss) - . - - - - -
djttst61M0tOt6sdiftjp9t -
9Ilom El Paso Sub Input locaUOn - Cost 0(6.1..) 10.818 6.8 6 _9.791 SAO BAN 8806 6,806 7252
88Oe
8.8010 8.806 8D6 8E05
Idaho Tariff Load ,nput (Class Allocation - Cost of Sales) 158,679 150,380 146,140 126,348 127,744 128,267 175,456 232,823 281,094 237,289 157,253 127,184 127,401
- I
Total Adjusted Load at Input without Monsanto Replacement
Check against Idaho Jurisdictional Allocation Idaho Base Load @ Input
* Note: Totals do not include Monsanto and Agrium loads for December.
oCtcl>
p CD
CD
Mt;11
287.203 280,662 293,6e6 246,395 269,155 262,615 314,969 361.447 420,354 376,659 292,567 269,156 264,722 F3,53410
OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK
Idaho MWH by Month
For Power Costs Only
Rate case PAC-E-08-07 line loss 4.543%
Rate case PAC-E-1 0-07 line loss 3.605%
Dec-10 Jan-11 Feb-il Mar-il Apr-li May-li Jun-111 Jul-11 Aug-il Sep-li Oct-11i Nov-li Total *
Total Idaho Actual Load 0 Input
Total Idaho Load @ Input with Replcmt. (assumes adjusted for Wholesale Sales IC 280,752 300,879 260,406 274,689 259,461 280,701 353,088 496,921 346,717 277,691 270,554 275,075
Monsanto Replacement load (with adj. for line loss & whlsale sales losses) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5,706 9,643
Total Idaho Load © Input without Replacement 280,752 300,879 260,406 274,689 259,461 280,701 353,088 496,921 346,717 277,691 264,757 265,431
Monsanta Actual Load tEl Input
Monsanto Sales © customer meter (includes replacment) 112,200 125,300 105,400 123,700 120,100 120,800 122,500 125,700 119,100 89,600 127,700 122,200 Monsanto replacement load at customers meter. 5,293 9,021 Monsanto Sales @ customer meter without Replacement 112,200 125,300 105,400 123,700 120,100 120,800 122,500 125,700 119,100 89,600 122,407 113,179
Transmission Loss % 4.422% 3.605% 3.605% 3.605% 3.605% 3.605% 3.605% 3.605% 3.605% 3.605% 3.605% 3.605%
Monsanto Load © Input without Replacement 117,161 129,817 109,200 128,159 124,430 125,155 126,916 130,231 123,394 92,830 126,820 117,259
Adj. Factor for for Moving Wholesale Energy Sales 3.029% 2.256% -0.042% 6.007% 3.185% 4.397% 0.787% 1.992% 2.249% 2.823% 5.695% 3.180% Adjusted Total Monsanto Load © Input without Replacement 120,710 132,746 109,154 135,859 128,392 130,658 127,914 132,826 126,169 95,451 134,042 120,987 1,374,199 Monsanto - ID Load % 42.995% 44.120% 41.917% 49.459% 49.484% 46.547% 36.227% 26.730% 36.390% 34.373% 50.628% 45.581%
Check
Agrium Actual Load tEl Inout
Agrium (El Paso Sub) Sales © customer meter
Transmission Loss %
Agrium Load @ Input
Ad). Factor for for Moving Wholesale Energy Sales
Adjusted Total Agrium Load © Input
Agrium - ID Load %
Remaining Tariff Customer Load tEl Input
Total Tariff Customer Load © Input
Tariff Customers - ID Load %
* Note: Totals do not include Monsanto and Agrium loads for December.
r
IN) C
Cs
IN)
0
9,903 10,357 9,148 10,147 9,820 9,492 4,654 8,971 9,198 9,215 9,736 9,257
4.422% 3.605% 3.605% 3.605% 3.605% 3.605% 3.605% 3.605% 3.605% 3.605% 3.605% 3.605%
10,341 10,731 9,477 10,513 10,174 9,834 4,821 9,295 9,530 9,547 10,087 9,591
3.029% 2.256% -0.042% 6.007% 3.185% 4.397% 0.787% 1.992% 2.249% 2.823% 5.695% 3.180%
10,654 10,973 9,473 11,145 10,498 10,267 4,859 9,480 9,744 9,817 10,661 9,896 106,812
3,796% 3.647% 3.638% 4.057% 4.046% 3.657% 1.376% 1.908% 2.810% 3.535% 4.027% 3.728%
149,388 157,160 141,779 127,686 120,571 139,776 220,314 354,616 210,804 172,424 120,054 134,548 2,049,119
53.210% 52.234% 54.445% 46.484% 46.470% 49.795% 62.396% 71.363% 60.800% 62.092% 45.345% 50.690%
100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% I 3,530,129 I
Idaho MWH by Month
For LCAR Only
Rate case PAC-E-08-07 line loss 4.543%
Rate case PAC-E-10-07 line loss 3.605%
Dec-10 Jan-li Feb-li Mar-il Apr-Il May-il Jun-11 Jul-111 Aug-li Sep-11l Oct-11 Nov-li Total *
Total Idaho Actual Load 0 Input
Total Idaho Load @ Input with Replcmt. (assumes adjusted for Wholesale Sales losses) 280,752 300,879 260,406 274,689 259,461 280,701 353,088 496,921 346,717 277,691 270,554 275,075
Monsanto Interupted Economic Curtailment (WI adj. for line loss & whlsale sales losses) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 527
Total Idaho Load @ Input adjusted for Monsanto Curtailment 280,752 300,879 260,406 274,689 259,461 280,701 353,088 496,921 346,717 277,691 270,554 275,602
Monsanta Actual Load ft Input
Monsanto Sales © customer meter (includes Replacement)
Monsanto Interupted Economic Curtailment (measured at customer meter)
Monsanto Sales © customer meter adjusted for Curtailment
Transmission Loss %
Monsanto Load @ Input adjusted for curtailment
Adj. Factor for for Moving Wholesale Energy Sales
Adjusted Total Monsanto Load @ Input adjusted for curtailment
Monsanto - ID Load %
Agrium Actual Load A Input
Agrium (El Paso Sub) Sales @ customer meter
Transmission Loss %
Agrium Load @ Input
Adj. Factor for for Moving Wholesale Energy Sales
Adjusted Total Agrium Load @ Input
Agnum - ID Load %
Remaining Tariff Customer Load 0 Input
Total Tariff Customer Load ll Input
Tariff Customers - ID Load %
* Note: Totals do not include Monsanto and Agrium loads for December.
CD
p
112,200 125,300 105,400 123,700 120,100 120,800 122,500 125,700 119,100 89,600 127,700 122,200
0 493
112,200 125,300 105,400 123,700 120,100 120,800 122,500 125,700 119,100 89,600 127,700 122,693
4.422% 3.605% 3.605% 3.605% 3.605% 3.605% 3.605% 3.605% 3.605% 3.605% 3.605% 3.605%
117,161 129,817 109,200 128,159 124,430 125,155 126,916 130,231 123,394 92,830 132,304 127,116
3.029% 2.256% -0.042% 6.007% 3.186% 4.397% 0.787% 1.992% 2.249% 2.823% 5.695% 3.180%
120,710 132,746 109,154 135,859 128,392 130,658 127,914 132,826 126,169 95,451 139,838 131,158 1,390,165
42.995% 44.120% 41.917% 49.459% 49.484% 46.547% 36.227% 26.730% 36.390% 34.373% 51.686% 47.590%
9,903 10,357 9,148 10,147 9,820 9,492 4,654 8,971 9,198 9,215 9,736 9,257
4.422% 3.605% 3.605% 3.605% 3.605% 3.605% 3.605% 3.605% 3.605% 3.605% 3.605% 3.605%
10,341 10,731 9,477 10,513 10,174 9.834 4,821 9,295 9,530 9,547 10,087 9,591
3.029% 2.256% -0.042% 6.007% 3.185% 4.397% 0.787% 1.992% 2.249% 2.823% 5.695% 3.180%
10,654 10,973 9,473 11,145 10,498 10,267 4,859 9,480 9,744 9,817 10,661 9,896 106,812
3795% 3.647% 3.638% 4.057% 4.046% 3.657% 1.376% 1.908% 2.810% 3.535% 3.941% 3.591%
149,388 157,160 141,779 127,686 120,571 139,776 220,314 354,616 210,804 172,424 120,054 134,548 2,049.119
53.210% 52.234% 54.445% 46.484% 46.470% 49.795% 62.396% 71.363% 60.800% 62.092% 44.374% 48.820%
Check 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% I 3,546,0961
IQ
0
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE THIS 26 " DAY OF JUNE 2012,
SERVED THE FOREGOING STAFF COMMENTS ON RECONSIDERATION, IN
CASE NO. PAC-E-12-03, BY MAILING A COPY THEREOF, POSTAGE PREPAID, TO
THE FOLLOWING:
TED WESTON
ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER
201 5 MAIN ST STE 2300
SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111
E-MAIL: [e-mail]
DATA REQUEST RESPONSE CENTER
E-MAIL ONLY:
[e-mail]
BRUBAKER & ASSOCIATES
16690 SWINGLEY RIDGE ROAD #140
CHESTERFIELD MO 63017
E-MAIL: [e-mail]
YVONNE HOGLE
ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER
201 S MAIN ST STE 2300
SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111
E-MAIL: Yvonne.hog1ec2ipacificorp.com
RANDALL C BUDGE
RACINE OLSON NYE BUDGE &
BAILEY CHARTERED
P0 BOX 1391
201 E CENTER
POCATELLO ID 83204-1391
E-MAIL: [e-mail]
E-MAIL ONLY:
JAMES R. SMITH
MONSANTO COMPANY
P0 BOX 816
SODA SPRINGS, ID 83276
E-MAIL: [e-mail]
SECRETA
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE