20170802intervention_order_no_33829.pdf

Office of the Secretary
Service Date
August 2,2017
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION )
OF AVISTA CORPORATION DBA AVISTA )CASE NOS.AVU-E-17-Ol
UTILITIES FOR AUTHORITY TO )AVU-G-17-O1
INCREASE ITS RATES AND CHARGES FOR )
ELECTRIC AND NATURAL GAS SERVICE )ORDER NO.33829
IN IDAHO )
On July 12,2017,Avista Corporation filed an “Objection of Avista Corporation to
Petition to Intervene of Sierra Club”in the above captioned matter.Avista claims that Sierra
Club will unduly broaden the issues of the case.Objection at 4-5.Specifically,Avista alleged
that Sierra Club will introduce argument about Coistrip’s remaining useful life.Id.at 3.The
Company indicated this is improper commentary for this general rate case as the expenditures are
“mandatory and compliance items,”and “have been routinely incurred.”Id at 2.Avista
suggested that its Integrated Resource Plan is the proper venue to address the depreciation rates
for Coistrip.Id.
Avista requested that the Commission deny Sierra Club’s request to intervene,or
“[i]n the very least ...clarify that any intervention by the Sierra Club should not [suggest]an
earlier termination date for Coistrip Units 3 and 4.Id.at 5.
On July 18,2017,Sierra Club filed a response to Avista’s objection.Citing
Commission Rule 74,Sierra Club argued that the Commission should continue its practice of
liberally allowing intervention,and points out that it filed a timely request for intervention and it
stated a direct and substantial interest in the outcome of the case.Response at 2-3.Sierra Club
further argued that Avista’s objection improperly argues the merits of the case.Id.at 3.Sierra
Club stated that “[a]t a minimum,scrutiny and review of [Colstrip]expenditures are warranted
through the pendency of this rate case proceeding.”Id.
Sierra Club also maintained that any argument relating to the Colstrip depreciation
rates are similarly premature.Sierra Club stated it did not know what,if any,position it will take
regarding the depreciation rate,as the case has not proceeded to that point yet.Id.4.However,
Sierra Club argued that “aligning depreciation schedules of large power plants with estimated
retirement dates is highly relevant to a general rate case.”Id.
ORDER NO.33829 1
Sierra Club declared that it will not unduly broaden the issues or delay the
proceedings,and will only address issues relevant to the case.ki.at 5.It points out that it filed a
timely Petition to Intervene,met the Comrnissions requirements under Commission Rules,and
identified gen-nane issues it will focus on,as well as issues that may arise upon further
investigation and analysis.
DISCUSSION
Avista’s objection claims Sierra Club’s intervention would unduly broaden the issues
by discussing the deprecation of certain facilities.We are not persuaded by the Company’s
argument.
Commission Rule 74 states grounds upon which the Commission grants petitions to
intervene.The rule states:
If a petition to intervene shows direct and substantial interest in any part of the
subject matter of a proceeding and does not unduly broaden the issues,the
Commission or the presiding officer will grant intervention,subject to
reasonable conditions.
IDAPA 31.01.01.074.Additionally,Commission Rule 124 is instructive regarding the scope of
a general rate case.Rule 124 states,in part:
When a notice of application designates a proceeding as a general rate case,
all persons are thereby put upon notice that the following are at issue and the
Commission may make decisions addressing them,whether the notice
explicitly repeats the following or not....The utility’s ...revenue
requirement,and every component of it,both rate base and expense,are at
issue.[Further,the]tariffs,practices,rules and regulations,service,
instrumentalities,equipment,facilities,classifications,and customer relations
of the utility are at issue,and the Commission may address any of them in its
order.
IDAPA 3 1.01.01.124.01 and .02.c.
Here,Sierra Club’s Petition to Intervene was timely filed,and meets the requirements
for intervention under Rule 74.Further,Rule 124 contemplates a broad purview in a general rate
case.At this time,Avista’s argument that Sierra Club may unduly broaden the issues is
speculative and premature.Further,Sierra Club attested that it will not unduly broaden the
issues or delay the proceedings.Accordingly,Avista’s objection,including limitation of
potential issues,is denied.
ORDER NO.33829 2
On July 12,2017,Sierra Club filed a Motion for Pro Hac Vice admission of its
California counsel,Travis Ritchie.The Motion was signed and attested to by Sierra Club’s local
counsel,Kelsey Nunez in Boise.Both counsel certify that they are active members in good
standing of their state bar organizations (California and Idaho).Sierra Club further stated that a
copy of the Motion and the applicable fee have been provided to the Idaho State Bar.Both
counsels certify that the above information is true to the best of their knowledge.Finally,Ms.
Nunez requests that the Commission excuse her from appearing during any Commission
proceeding in this matter.
The Commission has reviewed the Motion for Pro Hac Vice filed by Sierra Club,and
finds it reasonable to grant limited admission to Mr.Ritchie in this matter.The Commission also
finds that Ms.Nunez’s attendance in this proceeding shall not be required.
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Avista’s objection to Sierra Club’s intervention is
denied.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition to Intervene filed by the Sierra Club is
hereby granted.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion for Pro Hac Vice admission of Travis
Ritchie is granted.Ms.Nunez’s request to be excused is also granted.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all parties in this proceeding serve all papers
hereafter filed in this matter on all parties of record.This Intervenor is represented by the
following for purposes of service:
Travis Ritchie
Sierra Club
2101 Webster Street,Suite 1300
Oakland,CA 94612
E-mail:travis.ritchie(Zisierraclub.org
ORDER NO.33829 3
DONE by Order of the Idaho Public Utilities Commission at Boise,Idaho this
day of August 2017.
ATTEST:
PAUL KJELLAND PRESIDENT
Diane M.Hanian
Commission Secretary
O:AVU-E-17-O1 AVU-G-17-Olbk3
ERIC ANDERSON,COMMISSIONER
ORDER NO.33829 4