20220516Supplement Reply Comments.pdf

Y ROCKY MOUNTAIN
PotTYER
ADMSIOI{ OF iliAFI@BP
INf.ay 16,2022
YIA ELECTRONIC DELIVERY
Jan Noriyuki
Commission Secretary
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
I l3l W. Chinden Blvd
Building 8 Suite 20lA
Boise,ID 83714
Re:
tECi:iVED
,l'i?li['i i6 PH 3: It+1407 W. North Temple, Suite 330
Salt Lake City, Utah 84116
CASE NO. PAC-EALrc
IN TIIE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OR REJECTION
OF TITE POWER PTIRCHASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN PACIFICORP AI\ID
SUNI\TY BAR RANCH
Dear Ms. Noriyuki:
Please find for filing Rocky Mountain Power's supplemental reply comments in the
above-referenced matter.
lnformal inquiries may be directed to Ted Weston, Idaho Regulatory Manager at
[phone].
Very truly yours,
Joelle R. Steward
Senior Vice-President of Regulation and Customer Solutions
Enclosures
Emily L. Wegener, ISB #l 1614
Rocky Mountain Power
1407 WestNorth Temple, Rm 320
Salt Lake City, Utah 841l6
Telephone : [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Attorneyfor Roclgt Mountain Power
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION ) cAsE NO. PAC-E-21-10
FORAPPROVAL OR REJECTION OF THE )powER PURCHASE AGREEMENT ) MOTION FOR LEAVE TO
BETWEEN PACIFICORPAIID SUNNY ) SUPPLEMENT REPLY COMMENTSBARRANCH )
Rocky Mountain Power, a division of PacifiCorp, ("Company") respectfully requests,
pursuant to the Commission's Rules of Procedure ("RP") 56, that the Idaho Public Utilities
Commission ("Commission") grant permission for the Company to supplement its reply comments
filed on June 8, 202l,by accepting the proposed supplemental reply comments for filing. The
Company believes Commission Order Nos. 352621 and 352232, justifies the Company's
supplemental reply comments and change in position in this matter.
BACKGROTIND
I . During calendar year 2021 the Company had three pending qualified facility ("QF")
power purchase agreements ("PPA") before the Commission with similar circumstances:
l) Case No. PAC-E-20-l8,Amy Family Holdings ("Amy Family"), filed on December 3,2020;
2) Case No. PAC-E -21-10, Sunny Bar Ranch ("Sunny Bar"), filed on April I , 2021; and
3) Case No. PAC-E-21-14, Mink Creek Hydro ("Mink Creek"), filed on June 10, 2021.
I In the Matter of Roclcy Mountain Powerb Applicationfor Approval or Rejection of an Energt Sales Agreement
w ith Amy Family H oldings, LLC. PAC-E-20-18.
2 In the Matler of Roclcy Mountain Powerb Applicationfor Approval or Rejection of the Power Purchase Agreement
B etween P actJiC orp and Mink Creek Hydro, LLC. PAC-E-2I-I 4.
Page I
2. All three of the original PPAs in these cases were expiring and the QFs had
negotiated amendments or new agreements with the Company. During negotiations, the Company
identified that the nameplate capacity listed in all three of the original PPAs was smaller than the
actual nameplate capacity of the generation facility.
3 . The PPA amendment filed for Amy Family contained a single rate for all generation
output. The new Sunny Bar and Mink Creek PPAs contained two sets of avoided cost rates to apply
until the Company's first capacity deficiency date. The first rate included a payment for energy and
capacity while the second rate included payment for energy only. The second rate applied to the
energy produced above the capacity listed in the original contract.
PROPOSED SUPPLEMENTAL REPLY COMMENTS
4. On April 1,2021, the Company filed an application for approval or rejection of the
PPA between the Company and Sunny Bar. On April 23, 2021, Order No. 35012 provided Notice
of the Application and Notice of Modified Procedure ("Notice") pertaining to this matter applying
Modified Procedure pursuant to RP 201 through 204 and setting a comment deadline for
June l, 2021, and a reply comment deadline for June 8,2021.
5. Sunny Bar's original PPA, entered into on Jwe 27 , 1985, designated the facility as
a 350-kilowatt ("kW") hydro facility. While renegotiating the PPA the Company verified that
Sunny Bar's facility's nameplate capacity was actually 450 kW.
6. On June l, 2021, Commission Staff filed comments recommending that the
Commission direct the parties to file an amended PPA using one set of avoided cost rates with
immediate capacity payments for the entire 450 kW and to implement the 90/ll0 Rule based on
that rate structure, rather than Weighted-Average Conforming Energy Purchase Price based on two
sets of rates, one with capacity payments for up to 350kW listed in original PPA and one without
Page2
for any amount above 350kW up to 450kW until the Company's first capacity deficiency date, as
filed by the Company.
7. On June 8,2021, the Company filed reply comments agreeing to amend the
agreement with Sunny Bar. However, on July 29,2021, shortly after the Company filed reply
comments in the Sunny Bar proceeding, Commission stafffiled comments in the Mink Creek case
recommending the Commission approve that PPA with two set of rates. Staff recommended
immediate capacity and energy payments up to the 2.7 MW listed in the original PPA and energy
only payments above that amount until the Company's next capacity deficiency period.
8. On November 12, 2021, Commission Order No. 35223 approved the Mink Creek
PPA with two sets of rates: "one set of rates with avoided cost of capacity and avoided cost of
energl for up to 2.70 MWh each hout: qnd the second only with avoided cost of energt for
production above that level until the Companybfirst capacity deficiency date."1
9. On November 22, 202 I , Staff filed comments in the Amy Family case, consistent
with Commission Order No. 35223 in the Mink Creek case, recommending approval of the PPA
with "provisions thot describe the use of two sets of avoided cost rates. One set of rates uses
woided cost of capacity and avoided cost of energt as contoined in the Amendment and approved
in Order No. 3468j for up to 600 kilowatt-hours ("kWhs") each houn The second set of rates uses
avoided cost of energt only, as approved in Order No. 34683 ond ffictive November 18, 2020,
when the Amendment was signed by both parties, for production greater than 600 kWhs until the
Companybfirst capacity deficiency date." On December 20,2021, Comrnission Order No. 35262
approved the Amy Family amendment subject to the dual rate structure, and the Company and
Amy Family revised the amendment consistent with such order.
3 Mink Creek, Order No. 35223 at 3.
Page 3
10. With Commission approval of the dual rate structures in both the Mink Creek and
Amy Family cases, the Company is concerned about consistent treatment of the QF contracts.
Therefore, rather than accepting the recommendation of Commission Staff to amend the Sunny
Bar PPA, the Company now requests the Commission accept the PPA between the Company and
Sunny Bar, which reflects the dual rate approach, as filed with the Company's April 1,2021,
application.
REQT]EST FOR RELIEF
The Company respectfully requests permission to supplement its reply comments filed on
June 8, 2021, with the above supplemental reply comments and for the Commission to approve or
reject the Sunny Bar purchase power agreement as filed.
DATED this 16ft day of May 2022.
Respectful ly submitted,
ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER
Emily L
Attorneyfor RoclE Mountain Power
Page 4