20200220Final_Order_No_34558.pdf

Office of the Secretary
Service Date
February 20,2020
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF ROCKY MOUNTAIN )CASE NO.PAC-E-19-19
POWER'S APPLICATION FOR )
AUTHORITY TO MODIFY ELECTRIC )
SERVICE REGULATION NO.12 FOR )ORDER NO.34558
UNDERGROUND LINE EXTENSIONS )
AND SCHEDULE 300 )
On November 22,2019,Rocky Mountain Power ("Company"),a division of
PacifiCorp,applied to the Commission for authorityto revise its Electric Service Regulation No.
12-Line Extensions ("Regulation No.12")and Electric Service Schedule No.300-Regulation
Charges.The Company requested its Application be processed by Modified Procedure and the
tariff changes have an effective date of February 21,2020.
On December 24,2019,the Commission issued a Notice of Application and Notice of
Modified Procedure,setting public and Company reply comment deadlines.Commission Staff
filed the only comments and recommended the Commission approve the modifications.The
Company did not reply.
With this Order we approve the Company's Application.
BACKGROUND
A line extension is the addition of primary electric facilities to a property,subdivision,
or commercial building.By policy,the Company offers a line extension allowance,providing a
credit to new customers who require a line extension,to offset some of the upfrontfacility charges.
The purpose ofthe allowance is to provide adequate service to new customers who build or develop
beyond the Company's current distribution build-out without affecting the rate base to the
detriment of other customers.
The Company's line extension policies primarily are in Schedule 12 of the Company's
Electric Service Regulations.The line extensionpolicies have been modified several times:
In Order No.27682,Case No.UPL-E-96-04,the Company's policies were
updated to provide an allowance to residential developers equal to the actual
cost of the transformer,meter,and service in order to match residential
customer allowances.The order also changed the five-year refund period for
ORDER NO.34558 1
the initial applicant to recover his or her investment from successive applicants
who connected to the line extension.Id.
In Order No.30684,Case No.PAC-E-08-06,the policies were changed to
improve the likelihood of refunds to initial customers.These changes required
each of the next four customers who connected to the line to pay 20%of the
line extension but provided developers the opportunityto waive refunds.Id.
In Order No.33721,Case No.PAC-E-16-13,the policies were amended to
change the allowances from transformer,meter,and service drop to a $1,550
for residential customer line extensions and $3,536 non-residential customer
line extensions.
THE APPLICATION
The Company's Application requested authority to modifyRegulation No.12 to clarify
the definition of line extensions by adding substation and distribution facilities and proposed that
the same refund process apply to customer-provided underground work as is applied to customer
line extension advances.The proposed changes relate to Residential Extensions,Non-Residential
Extensions,Extensions to Non-Residential and Residential Planned Developments under
Regulation No.12.The Company requested changes to tariff Sheet Nos.12R.2 through 12R.14.
In its "Residential Extensions,"the Company's proposal included eliminating the
policy of the Company providing trenching,backfilling,conduits,etc.required for residential
undergroundline extensions at the customer's expense.Instead,the Company would provide an
allowance for customers who provide their own trenching,backfilling,conduits,etc.for
extensions.'The Company's proposed allowance for upgrades due to additional load was $550
and $1,550 if secondary or transformer upgrades are necessary.The Application also stated that
the refund for applicant-acquired right-of-way will be determined using the Company's standard
costing approach.
For its "Non-Residential Extensions,"the Company proposed several changes.These
included:
The refund base amount for applicant-provided labor and material on an underground extension will be determined by using the
Company's average costs for standard trenching,conduits,and vaults with footages and sizes as per the Company's design.
ORDER NO.34558 2
l.A requirement that an applicant whose load is of "speculative nature or
questionable permanency"and in excess of the Company's engineering limits
for distribution voltage,take delivery at transmission voltage;
2.Customers taking delivery below 46,000 volts will pay Contract Minimum
Billing2 fOT RÍ ÌORSt five years,but no more than 30 years.This is opposed to the
old rule in which customers could potentiallypay Contract Minimum Billing
indefinitely;and
3.During the first five years followinga non-residential line extension upgrade,
each of the next four 1,000 kVA,or greater,applicants must pay the Company
their proportional share of the already installed upgrade cost.
For its "Extensions to Non-Residential and Residential Planned Developments
Refunds,"the Company clarified it does not provide refunds on developer advances for facilities
located inside the development and used to serve the development,but a "developer who paid a
refundable advance may receive refunds when an applicant outside the development receives
power from an extensionif the connection was to a primary voltage line installed to,alongside,or
through the development."
The Company also updated its service terms for remote or isolated loads.The Company
proposed that if the cost of service was more than five times the estimated annual revenue the
customer would pay for Contract Minimum Billing unless the load is no longer distant or remote.
Additionally,the Company clarified that a customer could request relocation of distribution
facilities and the Company would relocate such facilities if the customer could secure and maintain
an adequate right-of-wayor easement for the relocation.
The Company also proposed updates to Schedule No.300 facilities charges that are
used to calculate contract minimum billings for line extensions.
THE COMMENTS
Staff reviewed the Company's Application and recommended Commission approval.
Staff also reviewed the historyof the Company's line extension policy modifications in the context
of the proposed modifications in this case.Staff noted that it supported the proposed changes to
Regulation No.12 because "these changes improve the cost equity split between parties requiring
line extensions and protect existing customers from potential cost shifting attributed to line
2 Contract Minimum Billing is defined in the Company's Electric Service Regulation No.12 Sheet 12R.1 l(b).
ORDER NO.34558 3
extension costs."Staff felt the changes improved transparency of the line extension process and
added clarification to the Regulations'language.Staff noted the changes are a step toward
improved consistency for the line extension policies across similar,but separate,customer groups
that include residential,non-residential,and residential and non-residential planned developments.
Staff's review included an audit of the data used to update Schedule No.300's,facilities
charges.Staff believed the proposed changes were reasonable.
COMMISSION FINDINGS AND DECISION
The Company is an electric corporation under Idaho Code §61-119,and a public utility
under Idaho Code §61-129.The Commission has jurisdiction over the issues in this case under
Title 61 of Idaho Code,including Idaho Code §§61-303,61-313,61-503.The Commission has
reviewed the record,includingthe Application and Staff's comments.Based on our review,we
approve the Company's Application to modify Electric Service Regulation No.12 and Schedule
No.300.
We find the clarifications proposed by the Company make Regulation No.12 easier for
customers to understand when deciding whether to upgrade their service throughline extension.
We support these clarifications,which ensure fair treatment for similarly situated customers who
will be eligible for refunds for customer-provided work for both above-ground and underground
line extensions.
We have reviewed the Company's workpapers regarding its updates to Electric Service
Schedule 300's Regulation Charges.We agree with Staff and the Company that the proposed
changes are reasonable and represent the most up-to-date data available to the Company.We
encourage the Company to continue to update Schedule No.300's Regulation Charges regularly.
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Company's Application to modifyElectric Service
Regulation No.12 and Electric Service Schedule No.300 is approved,effective as of February 21,
2020.
THIS IS A FINAL ORDER.Any person interested in this Order may petition for
reconsideration within 21-days of the service date of this Order regarding any matter decided in
this Order.Within seven days after any person has petitioned for reconsideration,any other person
may cross-petition for reconsideration.See Idaho Code §61-626.
ORDER NO.34558 4
DONE by Order of the Idaho Public Utilities Commission at Boise,Idaho this Ed
day of February 2020.
PAUL ¶ÁELL DER,PRESIDENT
KRI INE RAPER,CO MISSIONER
ERIC ANDERSON,COMMISSIONER
ATTEST:
Diane M.Hanian '
Commission Secretary
I:\Legal\ELECTRIC\PAC-E-19-19\orders\PACE1919_final_dh.doex
ORDER NO.34558 5