20160129order_no_33455_errata.pdf

Office of the Secretary
Service Date
January 29.2016
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION )
OF AVISTA CORPORATION DBA AVISTA )CASE NOS.AVU-E-15-05
UTILITIES FOR AUTHORITY TO )AVU-G-15-0i
INCREASE ITS RATES AND CHARGES FOR )
ELECTRIC AND NATURAL GAS SERVICE )ERRATA AND SUPPLEMENTAL
IN IDAHO )ORDER NO.33460
On January 25,2016,the Commission issued reconsideration Order No.33455
denying the Petitioner’s Petition for Reconsideration in the above captioned cases.Upon further
review,the Commission has determined that the findings regarding executive compensation
should be clarified pursuant to Rule 325.!The Commission now issues this Errata and
Supplemental Order clarifying Order No.33455.The Commission decision to deny
reconsideration remains unchanged.
ERRATA
On page one of Order No.33455,the Commission stated the following:
“The utility notes that there has been no increase in the base pay for Avista
executives since 2011,and that the settlement does not approve an increase
in executive base pay for 2016.”
This sentence should read:
“The utility notes that there has been no increase in the base pay for Avista
executives borne by ratepayers since 2011,and that the settlement does not
approve an increase in executive base pay for 2016.”
CLARIFICATION
To clarify the Commission’s findings in Order No 33455,the section entitled
“Commission Findings and Conclusions”is amended to read as follows:
As set out in the parties’settlement and explained in Avista’s reply,the level of
executive compensation was an issue addressed by the parties.Stipulation and Settlement at 4-6.
The settlement reflects the parties’mutual agreement that all incentive compensation for Avista
executives not be paid by ratepayers.In other words,the settlement precludes executives from
getting any incentive pay at ratepayer expense.In addition,the settlement also achieved a
‘Rule 325 allows the “Commission [to]clarify any order on its own motion.”IDAPA 31.01.01.325.
ERRATA AND SUPPLEMENTAL
ORDER NO.33460 1
reduction of $100,000 in non-officer incentives,when compared to the Company’s original
request.Settlement at 4.
Although executive incentive pay (at ratepayer expense)was prohibited under the
settlement,the parties agreed to,and the settlement allowed for,executives to receive an increase
in base pay at ratepayer expense.Prior to the settlement,executive base salaries attributable to
ratepayers had not increased since 2011.The settlement allows executive base pay as of March
2015 to be included in rates,but prohibits any further base pay increase for 2016.
We find that the parties negotiated in good faith,participated in extensive discovery,
including audits,and independent staff review.The parties all ultimately agreed to compromise
positions including consideration of executive compensation.The parties agreed to a settlement
because of a belief that the settlement achieved a better outcome than what might be gained
through hearing.We affirm that the settlement is fair,just,reasonable and in the public interest.
As set out in final Order No.33437,“[tjhe settlement represents a reasonable
compromise of the positions held by the parties and reflects a significant reduction in the
requested revenue increase.”Id.at 10.Based upon our review of the entire record,we find the
settlement and the resulting rates to be reasonable and in the public interest.Accordingly,we
deny reconsideration and affirm our prior Order No.33437.
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Commission Order No.33455 is amended,as set
forth above pursuant to Rule 325.IDAPA 3 1.01.01.325.
ERRATA AND SUPPLEMENTAL
ORDER NO.33460 2
DONE by Order of the Idaho Public Utilities Commission at Boise.Idaho this
day of January 2016.
PAUL KJELLANDER,PRFES1DENT
KRIS E RAPER,COMMISSIONER
Commissioner Anderson did not participate in this case
ERIC ANDERSON,COMMISSIONER
ATTEST:
f’A /
/--
Jd4n D.JewelV/
Commission Secretary
O:AVUE-I 5-O5AVU-G-15-0 lbk4
ERRATA AND SUPPLEMENTAL
ORDER NO.33460 3