20090529Peseau Direct.pdf

GIVE SLEY LLP
LAW OFFICES
601 W. Bannock Street
PO Box 2720, Boise, Idaho 83701
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FACSIMILE: 208 388-1300
WEBSITE: ww.givenspursley.com
Via Hand Delivery
Gary G. Allen
Peter G. Barton
Christopher J. Beeson
Clint R. Bolinder
Erik J. Bolinder
Jeremy C. Chou
Willam C. Cole
Michael C. Creamer
Amber N. Dina
Elizabeth M. Donick
Kristin Bjorkman Dunn
Thomas E. Dvorak
Jeffrey C. Fereday
Justin C. Fredin
Martin C. Hendrickson
May 28,2009
Jean Jewell
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
472 W. Washington
P.O. Box 83720
Boise, ID 83720-0074
Re:
Case Nos.
Our File:
Dear Jean:
Steven J. Hippler
Debora K. Kristensen
Anne C. Kunkel
Jeremy G. Ladle
Michael P. Lawrence
Franklin G. Lee
David R. Lombardi
John M. Marshall
Kenneth R. McClure
Kelly Greene McConnell
Cynthia A. Melilo
Christopher H. Meyer
L. Edward Miler
Patrick J. Miller
Judson B. Montgomery
Deborah E. Nelson
Kelsey J. Nunez
W. Hugh O'Riordan, LL.M.
Angela M. Reed
Justin A. Steiner
Scott A. Tschirgi, LL.M.
J. Wil Varin
Conley E. Ward
Robert B. White
RETIRED
Kenneth L. Pursley
James A. McClure
D. Giv~(1917-2008)~..0
'"Cf
-0~.r
N-J
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF A VISTA
CORPORA nON FOR THE AUTHORITY TO INCREASE ITS RATES
AND CHARGES FOR ELECTRIC AND NATURAL GAS SERVICE
TO ELECTRIC AND NATURAL GAS CUSTOMERS IN THE STATE
OF IDAHO.
AVU-E-09-I/AVU-G-09-1
10504-1
Enclosed for fiing please find an original and nine (9) copies of the Direct
Testimony of Dennis E. Peseau on behalf of Clearwater Paper Corporation in connection
with the above entitled matter.
Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
MCC/tma
cc: Service List (w/enclosures)
580760_1
ORIGINAL
Conley E. Ward (ISB No. 1683)
Michael C. Creamer (ISB No. 4030)
GIVENS PURSLEY LLP
601 W. Banock Street
P.O. Box 2720
Boise, ID 83701-2720
Telephone No. [phone]
Fax No. [phone]
cew(igivenspursley.com
mcc(igivenspursley.com
F~EC;t:,
?nnqy.~.y 2R. p. 'i"~i 4,: ?7Lth.;./ n~,i . '- '-
Attorneys for Clearwater Paper Corporation
10504. i /578322_9
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION
OF A VISTA CORPORA nON FOR THE
AUTHORITY TO INCREASE ITS RATES
AND CHARGES FOR ELECTRIC AND
NATURAL GAS SERVICE TO ELECTRIC
AND NATURAL GAS CUSTOMERS IN THE
STATE OF IDAHO.
Case Nos. A VU-E-09-1
AVU-G-09-1
DIRECT TESTIMONY
OF
DENNIS E. PESEAU
ON BEHALF OF
CLEARWATER PAPER CORPORATION
1 Q.
2 A.
3
4 Q.
5 A.
6
7
8 Q.
9 A.
10
11 Q.
12
13 A.
14 Q.
15 A.
16
17 Q.
18
19 A.
20
21
22
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND BUSINESS ADDRESS.
My name is Dennis E. Peseau. My business address is Suite 250, 1500 Liberty Street,
S.E., Salem, Oregon 97302.
BY WHOM AND IN WHAT CAPACITY ARE YOU EMPLOYED?
I am President of Utility Resources, Inc. (URI). URI has consulted on a number of
economic, financial, and engineering matters for varous private and public entities for
more than twenty years.
ARE YOU SPONSORING EXHIBITS IN THIS CASE?
Yes, attached are Exhibits 301, 302 and 303, which were prepared by me or under my
supervision.
DOES EXHIBIT 301 ACCURA TEL Y DESCRIBE YOUR BACKGROUND AND
EXPERIENCE?
Yes.
HAVE YOU TESTIFIED PREVIOUSLY BEFORE THIS COMMISSION?
Yes. I have testified before the Idaho Commission on numerous occasions since the early
1980's.
WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF YOUR DIRECT TESTIMONY IN THESE
PROCEEDINGS?
My testimony discusses two issues in Avista Corporation's ("Avista" or "the Company")
cost of service study that are, in my opinion, incorrect and particularly onerous to higher
load factor customers including my client, Clearwater Paper Corporation. I believe the
issues I raise, and the corrections I propose, significantly improve the accuracy of
DIRECT TESTIMONY OF DENNIS E. PESEAU ON BEHALF OF CLEARWATER PAPER CORPORATION - 1
1
2
3 Q.
4
5 A.
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13 Q.
14
15 A.
16
17
18
19
20
21
Avista's cost of service for Clearwater without materially modifying the Company's
eventual allocation of costs to other customer classes.
WHAT is THE FIRST COST OF SERVICE ISSUE YOU RAISE IN THESE
PROCEEDINGS?
The first issue pertains to the classification of transmission costs. I provide a brief
historical background with examples of transmission cost classification methods
currently used by neighboring utìlties, as well as the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission ("FERC") to argue transmission costs are incurred to meet Avista's winter
and summer peak loads. As this Commission and many other regulatory bodies have
recognized, transmission facilities are constructed primarily for meeting system peak
loads and such costs therefore are properly classified as demand. Avista, however,
allocates nearly two thirds of system transmission costs to energy.
WHAT is THE PRACTICAL RESULT OF AVISTA'S CLASSIFICATION OF
SIGNIFICANT TRANSMISSION COSTS TO ENERGY?
The Company's classification method shifts high system costs it incurs to meet peak
demands to off -peak periods. This result is prejudicial and unfair to high load factor
customers such as Clearwater. It is also a terrible economic policy because customer
rates under this method wil be too low during peak periods, and too high during lower-
cost, off-peak periods. The skewed rates wil promote more on-peak demand, leading to
greater required generation, transmission and some distribution facilities, to the detriment
of all A vista customers.
DIRECT TESTIMONY OF DENNIS E. PESEAU ON BEHALF OF CLEARWATER PAPER CORPORATION - 2
1 Q.
2
3 A.
4
5
6
7
8
9 Q.
10
11 A.
12
13 Q.
14
15 A.
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
PLEASE DESCRIBE YOUR PROPOSED CORRCTION TO A VISTA'S
CLASSIFICATION OF TRANSMISSION COSTS.
I recommend that 100% of A vista's transmission costs be classified as demand related.
This is the method routinely used by FERC for both A vista and Idaho Power, and it is the
classification adopted by this Commission in the last Idaho Power rate case. Admittedly,
there are cases in which a small portion of a company's transmission costs are classified
as energy costs for various reasons, but A vista's classification of 63.5% of such costs to
energy is completely unprecedented in my experience.
DOES A VISTA ATTEMPT TO JUSTIFY THIS CLASSIFICATION IN ITS
TESTIMONY?
Not really. I think the classification simply is an unintended result of a misapplication of
the "peak credit" cost of service study A vista uses.
BOTH YOU AND A VISTA WITNESS MS. TARA KNOX REFER TO THE
"PEAK CREDIT METHOD." WHAT IS THIS?
The peak credit method has a long history of use, but for generation costs only. The peak
credit method was first developed by the National Economic Research Associates, Inc.
("NERA") in 1977 as part of a national effort to foster a sound U.S. energy pricing policy
among the states. These efforts eventually formed the underpinning for costing and
reporting requirements under the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act ("PURP A") of
1978.
The point that I must emphasize in this regard is that the peak credit method pertains to,
and is valid only for, generation facilities. The peak credit refers to the process by which
the total capital costs of a generation plant are split, or "credited" into demand and energy
classifications. In short, the capital costs of baseload generating plants, because they are
DIRECT TESTIMONY OF DENNIS E. PESEAU ON BEHALF OF CLEARWATER PAPER CORPORATION - 3
1
2
3
4 Q.
5
6
7 A.
8
9
10
11
12
13 Q.
more efficient than a peaking plant, have a fuel savings component that is "credited" to
energy, while the minimal capital costs associated with a combustion turbine ("peaker")
are "credited" to demand.
TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE, WAS THE PEAK CREDIT METHOD THAT A VISTA
APPLIES TO BOTH GENERATION AND TRANSMISSION PLANT EVER
INTENDED TO BE APPLIED TO TRANSMISSION PLANT?
No. Unlike generating facilities, transmission facilities do not have a fuel savings
component, and therefore, they have nothing logical to "credit" or classify to energy.
The peak credit method originated by NERA was applied only to the classification of
generation plant. Transmission plant was always classified to demand in the NERA
studies. A vista should reconsider this issue, and the Commission should use the 100%
demand classification that it has adopted in all prior Idaho Power Company proceedings.
HAVE YOU MADE THESE RECOMMENDED CHANGES IN THE COMPANY
14 COST OF SERVICE MODEL?
15 A.Yes. My Exhibit 302 contains a three page summary of the outcome of changing
16 Avista's original base case by a reclassifying of transmission to 100% demand.
17 Q.HOW WOULD YOUR PROPOSED CHANGE TO A VISTA'S COST OF
18 SERVICE MODEL BE IMPLEMENTED?
19 A.The change from Avista's assumed 36.49/63.51 demand/energy split to 100% demand
20 simply requires the user to locate the "assign worksheet" in the Company cost of service
21 model and change A vista's transmission classification percentages to 0% energy, 100%
22 demand.
DIRECT TESTIMONY OF DENNIS E. PESEAU ON BEHALF OF CLEARWATER PAPER CORPORATION - 4
1 Q.
2
3 A.
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PLEASE SUMMARIZE THE RESULTS OF YOUR PROPOSED
RECLASSIFICATION.
The results are summarized in Table 1 below. In this table, each customer class's retur
contribution is compared to respective rates for the class. A so-called "return ratio" is
then computed for each customer class. If each customer class had rates in effect that
exactly equaled its costs to serve, the return ratio would be unity (one). If a customer
class's return index is greater than (less than) one, it is paying a rate higher than (lower
than) its cost of service.
CUSTOMER CLASS BASE CASE-RETURN INDEX* CLEARWATER RETURN INDEX **
Resid-Schedule 1
General Service 1 1 - 1 2
Large Gen Service 21-22
Extra Large Gen 25
Extra Large Potlatch 25P
Pumping Service 31-32
Lighting Service 41-49
.85
1.48
1.26
.59
.73
1.43
.92
.82
1.44
1.27
.64
.84
1.47
.94
*36.49% demand, 63.51% energy
* * 100% demand, 0% energy
Note that the changes in the return ratios of all customer classes, with the exception of
Clearwater, are very smalL. However, this change in transmission classification has a
fairly significant impact on the calculated return ratio of Clearater-an increase from
.73 to .84. This overall result is expected, due to Clearwater's relatively level
consumption throughout the year. Again, I regard my change of transmission
classification as consistent with the way A vista plans its system. It improves cost
allocation to reflect peak and off-peak seasonal cost differences, and attributes demand
costs according to cost causation. The detailed results of this modification are provided
in my Exhibit 302.
DIRECT TESTIMONY OF DENNIS E. PESEAV ON BEHALF OF CLEARWATER PAPER CORPORATION - 5
1 Q.
2
3 A.
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11 Q.
12
13 A.
14
15
16
17 Q.
18
19 A.
20
21
22
23
24
PLEASE EXPLAIN YOUR SECOND ISSUE REGARDING TRANSMISSION
COSTS.
The second issue is very similar to the first issue I raised above. Avista's cost of service
study furher misallocates peak season transmission costs to off-peak seasons by, in effect,
assuming that customer demands use transmission capacity equally in each and every
month of the year. Just as I argued that Avista's system planing of transmission facìlties
is driven by its need to meet peak season (summer and winter) customer demands, this
same principle calls for allocation of transmission costs to Avista's peak seasons. Faìlng
to do so, as now is the case in Avista's cost of service study, again understates higher peak
season costs. Therefore, peak rates are under priced, while off-season rates are overpriced.
HOW DOES A VISTA'S COST OF SERVICE STUDY MISALLOCATE
TRANSMISSON COSTS?
Unlike most electric utilties, including Idaho Power for example, A vista implicitly
assumes that lower customer demands in the off-peak fall and spring seasons impose
"stress"-that is, capacity utilization of its transmission facilities--qual to that in the high
demand winter and summer seasons. This cannot be justified in fact.
HOW DO MOST OTHER UTILITIES PERFORM TRANSMISSION DEMAND
ALLOCATIONS?
Since the need for transmission facilities is driven by seasonal peak demands, peak
demand months are easily identified, and as a result, costs are allocated predominantly (not
always entirely) to these months. Consequently, summer and/or winter months logically
show the highest costs of service.
An ilustration of transmission costs being allocated to the peak season is the Commission-
approved Idaho Power method of weighting its transmission costs according to "peak
DIRECT TESTIMONY OF DENNIS E. PESEAU ON BEHALF OF CLEARWATER PAPER CORPORATION - 6
1
2
3
4 Q.
5
6 A.
7
8
9 Q.
10
11 A.
12
13
14
15
16 Q.
17
18
19
20 A.
21
22
23
deficiencies" of each month. Peak deficiencies occur overwhelmingly in the months of
June, July and August on Idaho Power's system. Idaho Power, therefore, allocates all
transmission costs to this summer season.
DOES AVISTA'S SEASONAL PATTERN OF CUSTOMER PEAK DEMANDS
FOLLOW THOSE EXPERIENCED IN IDAHO POWER'S SERVICE SYSTEM?
No. To appropriately modify Avista's current twelve-month, equally-weighted method,
one must recognize that A vista typically experiences both summer and winter month
system peak demands.
HOW DO YOU PROPOSE TO MODIFY A VISTA'S COST STUDY IN THIS
REGARD?
A vista experiences significant winter month peak demands in November, December,
January and February. The Company experiences significant summer month peak
demands in June, July and August. Rather than allocate transmission costs to summer only
as Idaho Power does, it is appropriate to spread Avista's transmission demand costs to both
the four-month winter and the three-month summer seasons.
HAVE YOU COMPLETED AN A VISTA COST OF SERVICE STUDY THAT
INCORPORATES BOTH OF YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS PERTAINING TO
THE RECLASSIFICATION AND REALLOCATION OF AVISTA'S
TRANSMISSION COSTS?
Yes. My Exhibit 303, consisting of three pages, summarizes the results of such a study.
As expected, the better allocation of transmission costs to the higher cost peak demand
seasons shows that customers using power on a level, more effcient basis throughout the
year receive more favorable (lower) allocations of transmission costs.
DIRECT TESTIMONY OF DENNIS E. PESEAU ON BEHALF OF CLEARWATER PAPER CORPORATION - 7
1 Q.
2 A.
3
4
5 Q.
6 A.
7
8
9
10
11 Q.
12 A.
WHAT is THE SPECIFIC FINDING FOR CLEARWATER IN THIS STUDY?
Exhibit 302, which only reclassified transmission to 100% demand, produced a return ratio
of .84 for Clearwater. Exhibit 303 shows a return ratio for Clearater of .92, or very
nearly unity (Ex. 303, Pg. 1 of 3, line 40, column (k).
PLEASE SUMMARIZE YOUR CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.
After correcting Avista's cost of service treatment of transmission costs, Clearwater's
relative rate of return is roughly equivalent to the average for all customer classes. Given
the fact that there are stil problems with the reliability of Avista's underlying cost of
service data, I recommend that any increase in Avista's rates that may be granted in this
case be spread "across the board" to all customer classes.
DOES THIS CONCLUDE YOUR DIRECT TESTIMONY?
Yes.
DIRECT TESTIMONY OF DENNIS E. PESEAU ON BEHALF OF CLEARWATER PAPER CORPORATION - 8
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 28th day of May, 2009, I caused to be served a true and
correct copy of the foregoing document by the method indicated below, and addressed to the
following:
Jean Jewell
Idaho Public Utilties Commission
472 W. Washington Street
P.O. Box 83720
Boise, ID 83720.0074
Email: jean.jewell(fpuc.ìdaho.gov
D U.S. Mail
IZ Hand Delivered
D Overnight Mail
D Facsimile
o Email
Dean J. Miler
McDevitt & Miler, LLP
420 West Banock Street
P.O. Box 2564
Boise, ID 83702
Email: joe(fmcdevitt-miler.com
Represents Idaho Forest Group LLC
IZ U.S. Mail
o Hand Delivered
o Overnight Mail
D Facsimile
IZ Email
Scott Atkinson, President
Idaho Forest Group LLC
171 Highway 95 N
Grangevile,ID 83530
Email: scotta(fidahoforestgroup.com
Represents Idaho Forest Group LLC
IZ U.S. Mail
o Hand Delivered
o Overnight Mail
D Facsimile
IZ Email
Donald L. Howell, II
Kristine A. Sasser
Deputy Attorneys General
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
472 W. Washington
P.O. Box 83720
Boise, ID 83720-0074
Email: don.howell(fpuc.ìdaho.gov
kris. sasser(fpuc. idaho. gOY
Represents Commission Staff
IZ U.S. Mail
o Hand Delivered
D Overnight Mail
D Facsimile
IZ Email
David J. Meyer, Vice President
Kelly Norwood, Vice President
A vista Utiities
P.O. Box 3727
1411 E. Mission Avenue, MSC-7
Spokane, WA 99220-3727
Email: david.meyer(favistacorp.com
Email: kelly.norwood(favistacorp.com
Represents Avista Corporation
IZ U.S. Mail
D Hand Delivered
D Overnight Mail
D Facsimile
IZ Email
DIRECT TESTIMONY OF DENNIS E. PESEAU ON BEHALF OF CLEARWATER PAPER CORPORATION - 9
Dennis E. Peseau, Ph.D.
Utility Resources Inc.
1500 Liberty Street SE, Suite 250
Salem, OR 97302
Email: dpeseau(iexcite.com
Represents Clearwater Paper Corporation
rz U.S. Mail
D Hand Delivered
D Overnight Mail
D Facsimile
rz Email
Betsy Bridge
Idaho Conservation League
710 N. Sixth Street
P.O. Box 844
Boise, Idaho 83701
Email: bbridge(iwildidaho.org
Represents Idaho Conservation League
rz U.S. Mail
D Hand Delivered
D Overnight Mail
D Facsimile
rz Email
Rowena Pineda
Idaho Community Action Network
3450 Hil Road
Boise, Idaho 83702-4715
Email: Rowena(gidahocan.org
Represents Idaho Community Action Network
rz U.S. Mail
D Hand Delivered
D Overnight Mail
D Facsimile
rz Email
Carrie Tracy
1265 S. Main Street, #305
Seatte, W A 98144
carrie(inwfco.org
Represents Idaho Community Action Network
rz U.s. Mail
D Hand Delivered
D Overnight Mail
D Facsimile
rz Email
Brad M. Purdy
Attorney at Law
2019 N. 1 th Street
Boise, Idaho 83702
Email: bmpurdy(ihotmail.comRepresent, Communtty Action Porinmhtp A"Octo~ ~
Michael C. Creamer
rz U.S. Mail
D Hand Delivered
D Overnight Mail
D Facsimile
rz Email
DIRECT TESTIMONY OF DENNIS E. PESEAU ON BEHALF OF CLEARWATER PAPER CORPORATION - 10
EXHIBIT 301
STATEMENT OF OCCUPATIONAL AND
EDUCATIONAL HISTORY AND QUALIFICATIONS
DENNIS E, PESEAU
Dr. Peseau has conducted economic and financial studies for regulated
Industries for the past thirty-five years. In 1972. he was employed by Southern
California Edison Company as Associate Economic Analyst. and later as Economic
Analyst. His responsibilities included review of financial testimony. incremental cost
studies. rate design. econometric estimation of demand elasticities and various areas
in the field of energy and economic growth. Also, he was asked by Edison Electrical
Instiute to study and evaluate several prominent energy models as part of the Ad
Hoc Committee on Economic Growth and Energy Pricing,
From 1974 to 1978, Dr. Peseau was employed by the Pubffc Utility
Commissioner of Oregon as Senior Economist. There he conducted a nl,mber of
economic and financial studies and prepared testimony pertaining tö public utilties,
In 1978 Dr. Paseau established the Northwest office of Zind.er
Companies. Inc. He has since submitted testimony on economic and financial
matters before state regulatory commissions In Alaska, California. Idano. Maryland,
Minnesota. Montana, Nevada, Washington, Wyoming. the District of Columbia, the
Bonnevlle Power Administration and the Public Utiities Board of Alberta on over one
hundred occasions. He has conducted marginal cost and rate design studies and
prepared testimony on these matters in Alaska. California. Idaho. Maryland.
Minnesota, Nevada, Oregon, Washington and In the District of Columbia. He has
EXHIBIT 301
CASE Nos. A VU-E-09-11 A VU-G-U9-1
D. PESEAU -CLEARWATER PAPER CORPORATION
PAGE I of3
also conducted Cost and rate studies regarding PURPA issues in the states of
Alaska, California, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New York, Washington, and
Washington, D,C.
Dr. Peseau holds the BA, M,A. and PhD, degrees in economics.
He has co-authored a book in the field of industrial organization entitled,
.s.I~e, Profits an~lJlive Compensatlon in the Large C.9IP.Q, which devotes
a chapter to regulated industries,
Dr. Peseau has published articles in the following professional Journals:
Review of ECQnomics and Stalistjç¡¡, Atlanlic Eçol19.m!c Joumal, Journal of Financis!1
Management and Journal oi:pnal Science" His articles have been read bofore
the Econometric Society, the Western Economic Association, the Financial
Management Association, the Regional Science Association and universites in the
United Kingdom as well as in the United States,
He has guest lectured on marginal costing methods in seminars in New
Jersey and California for the Center of Professional Advancement. He has also
guest lectured on cost of capital for the public utility industry before the Pacific Coast
Gas and Electric Associatìon, and for the Executive Seminar at the Colgate Darden
Graduate School of Business, University of Virginia.
Dr, Peseau and his firm have participated with and been members of the
American Economic Association, the American Financial Association, the Western
Economic Association, the Atlantic Economic Association and the FinancIal
EXHIBIT 301
CASE Nos. A VU-E-09.11 A VU-G-09-1
D. PESEAU -CLEARWATER PAPER CORPORATION
PAGE 2 of3
'Management Association, He was formerly a member of the Staff Subcommitee on
Economics of the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners,
Dr, Peseau has been President of Utiliy Resources, Inc, since 1985.
EXHIBIT 301
CASE Nos. A VU-E-09-1I A VU-G-09-I
D. PESEAU -CLEARWATER PAPER CORPORATION
PAGE 3 of3
EXHIBIT 302
Exhlbí302
Dennis Peseau
SuIl'I AVISTA UTILITES IØaho JUli,Øicn
SCri: Tran,lÌ"io 100% De CoslotSeice Basic Summary EleclricUllIly 01114105
AVU.E.0'.Q1 Meuior FoilIe Tweve Moths Ended Seember 30, 208
(b)(e) (Ø) Ie)(~(g)Ih)Iii Q)(k)(I)1m)
Rcsidei'lial General ¡.arge Gon Extra Large Exira I.argo Ptnl,ng Siiooi&
Sys Servic Seivice SOl'ice Gon Soo Serve Pollh Sorvce Ai.aUghls
OBscrlplion tota So 1 Sth 11.12 So 21.22 Sch25 sc,2(P So 31.32 So 41.49
Plantlii Saes
Prouction Planl 373,731,100 135,22,060 31,650.169 75,194,994 32149.197 66,363.17 5,962,243 1,163,321
Transmission pia 160,359,00 63.467,002 17,679,0'0 31,601,937 13,209,791 31.706,766 2,337,273 337,169
Dì'lIibllOn Plan1 391,018,00 19,358.42/61.,71.76 91.364.302 10.133,997 2,159.02 6,513,166 19,320,326
Inlan9ible Piani 39,605,00 15,807,254 4,246,736 1,542.130 3.05.655 8,012075 632.436 249,713
Goeral Planl 61,178,00 32,618,422 8,074,244 9,367,351 2,815,00 6,276,885 955,397 1,010,689
loiall~ani in Sei 1,025,891,00 444.558,664 119,n3:i 215,010.719 61,960,646 134,575.66/16,400,516 22,101,221
Ac Deprecailoll
7 Prouc Plant (146,68100)(,2,86'1,182)(14.16423)(29,540,070)(12,641.159)P4111,303)(2.348,98)(47,25)
6 lransmion Planl (5'.110,00)(220'19,64)(6,148455)(10.990,590)(4.594,130)(11,027,055)(612,662)(11.261)
9 Oitruli Planl (121,422,00)(60,622.02)(1/,696.221)(28,258,437)(3,147,09')(689,459)(2,m,039)(6,58ó.42)
10 Intanìble Plant (6,50,000)13,229.491)(614,069)(1,064.170)(35,099)1849.6651 (102,040)(88.66)
11 GoralPlanl j26,164,ooO)(14,2\,01,)(3,532,:i)(4.096,00)(1,231,502)(2,4!,9961 (417,96)(442,154)
12 IOlal AcumulaloCl Ooprectiri (357.14/.000)(153,06509/1 (.2,90IAl4)(73,951.274)(21,910,5841 149,47.;60)(6,104,694)(9,704.197)
13 NOI Plant 666,744.000 791,43,561 86,31),89'14U19.4115 39.990.62 6b,I)l.387 12,295,621 12,:)1,023
14 Àcc/mllaiOå lJeIOlreØ I'll (94,217,0001 140,M6,5QB)ill,660,?n)(19,474,3W)().898,141)(13,21.001)(1.609,511)(1.8l3,414)
15 Misciieous RalO Ba",2,967,000 614,613 23B,20 m,96 342,491 932,131 52,457 9,136
16 'f Oliiiaio Bil 5/7,434,000 751,539,673 74,Il3,626 \22,4?305 34,434,412 72871,71 10,686,56 10,58,747
17 Revonve fiom ii.tail RalO'220,:12,000 86,35,000 27,641,000 46,634,00 14.497,000 3/,941,00 4,1:m 2,842,00
18 01li' OpeaUng RevOIue,32,90,00 12,229,464 3,29,656 6,654.523 2,733,316 7,164.247 528,842 167,96
19 TOiaI Renues 253,160,000 98,587.44 31,2/0,656 53,211,523 17.230,318 45,105.247 4,667,842 3,00,96
Opefalwig Expenses
20 Prodclion.Expeses 132,634,000 46,952,246 13,071,925 26,812,020 11,520,641 31,666,624 2,157,965 452,360
21 Transmssion Expenses 6,346,000 3,305,Olg 920,339 1,645,140 687,678 1,650,598 121.674 1',552
22 Dì'tribvlio E,peso&9,020,oo 4,628,,65 1,33.111 2,26,35 325,069 6B,9O 1B3.439 818.875
23 Customer Acountíg Expenses 3,84,00 2,571,7.5 56,133 159,263 37,121 96,166 44.220 9.6/8
24 CustoniCl ~lformatÌ( Expeses 1.37,00 On65 169.321 260,012 110,134 295.291 23.169 4,19
25 Safes L:xPCSOS 235,00 76,93'1 21,975 48,021 20,661 60,270 3.995 934
26 Admlf & Goneral Expenses 71,605,00 11,736,71 2,835,427 3,471,185 1.031,914 2,313,643 345,667 3/0,253
27 100ai O&M E'penss 111.469,00 69.446.35 18.919.907 34,667,596 13,733,42 36.152,187 2.880,329 1,674,192
28 faxes Olher Than Incme Taxes 8.751,00 3,608,710 1,044,'1 1,827.51'594,641 1,361,033 151,527 142,836
29 OIhor Inc6 Rêed 116m'(106,00)(41,663)(11,6)')(20.903)(8.744)(21,069)(1,550)(226)
Deciation Expenso:J Procloo .Plsni Oooriaton 9,335,00 3,39,56 945,96 1.815.601 800,692 2,137,719 148,120 28.936
31 T,ansmsiOl Planl Deprecaiio 3,232,00 1,279,56 356.317 636,930 266.240 639,043 47,107 6,796
32 OislribulÎn Plani Deprecalion 10.048.00 4,965,162 \.601.84 ~_459,U?9 306,220 51,900 22,182 438,121
33 Gonerai Viani Depralin 4,661.000 2,599,12 6'2,344 14!..218 223,947 499,356 '16,00 8OMI;
34 Amtir.alion Expens 2,256,00 817,50)m,611 453,762 193,93 520,139 35,942 7,10tJ
35 Toial Depreclin EXjn",29,736,00 13,059,525 3.11,671 6,110.79 1,791.36 3,848,11;7 533,35 561.36
36 Incolax 6,445,00 \.487.949 1,/91,09)2.333,416 15,8481 473.220 265,336 '¥,17
31 lolal Oprating Expenses 122291,00 87.560,ô8 ?5.517.705 44,97.421 16,104,115 41,833,521 3,829.00 2,4)7,939
38 Nellncoma 30,863,00 11026.166 5152,951 6,315,09 1,125,603 3,U1.20 838.843 532,021
39 HalO oj Helurn 5.34%4.38%166%6.79%3.27%4.119'/0 78ó04 503
40 RetumRalio 100 062 104 121 0,61 0.84 1M 094
41 Interes Expense 19,05ó,00O 8,30,669 2A/1.455 4,039,893 1,136,316 2,44,726 352.11 3.9,225
FIle io 09 Ele Case i ElOe COS ßa,e Caso I Sum",sl ¡:.hilils Page 1 013
EXHIBIT 302
CASE Nos. A VU-E-09-lI A VU-G-09-1
D. PESEAU -CLEARWATER PAPER CORPORATION
PAGE I of3
Exhibil302
Dennis Peseau
Surncoi AVISIA UlililiES Idaho JlJridiCtln
SCf\ario: TransmisSi 100'. Deal'Heveoe 10 Cot by fuoclioal CompOnl.'fl Sumrmry Eiee U~llly 01/14/OJ
AVU-E.04.01 Mellod For Ihelweve Moll, Endd Sep0mb 30, 200
Ibl 101 Id) (e)IQ (g)Ihl lil (j Ik)(I)(ml
Residlial General l.arge Goo Exira iarge txaiare Pumping StrS
svem Serv Servi servce Gen Servi Scce f'dalh Se Arial.igiis
Oosoi/)on lotal Soh 1 Se 111~Se ~1.22 Se 25 Sel25 SCIl 31.32 Se 41-49
Fuiicllonal c.., Compon.... at Curreii! Retrn by SChocule
Prouellon 135,566.805 47.034.012 14,~26.5&28.94.48 11,215.221 31,789,078 2,347,461 460.02
Transmission 16,17,354 5.932,869 2,148,335 3,636,581 1,108.892 3,017.069 29,110 34,496
OiSlIll 43.256,271 20,098,457 7.984,168 10,526,592 1,051,515 577,802 1,065,23 1,931.16
Common 25,257.56 13,292.662 3.461,313 3.976,379 1.21.72 2.551.051 413.006 415.784
Totl CuNenl Rale Revenue nO,252,ooO 66,358,00 27,841,000 46,634,00 14,497.000 37.941,00 4,139,000 2,842,00
E'Jles"$JWh
6 PrOduction $0.03007 $0,04049 SO 04400 $0.04025 $0,0370 $0,03502 $0,03993 $0.03346
'I Transmissio $0.0064 $0.00511 $0,00 $0,0014 $0.0053 $0.00332 $0.0099 $0,00251
6 I)isiribulion $0.01240 $0.0170 SO 02469 $0,01487 SO,OO35 SO.0064 $0.01846 $0,14052
9 Common $0.00'1 $0,01144 $O-00n $0,002 $0-0357 $0.0282 $0.00703 $0,03025
10 lotal Currni Me00 Rale'$0.06316 $0.07435 $0,0810 $0,06587 $0,04614 SO,04179 S(1.7040 $0,206'1
Functional Cost Component. at Uniform Current Re1um
11 pfoducüon 136,108,108 4820..66 13.421,185 i7511.329 11,819.770 32,472.185 2.213.494 463.461
12 Transmissio 16,362,662 6.4'1.214 1.9'J,334 3)33.22 1,353,666 3.21,143 240,347 35.6M
13 Oislribion 42,444,209 21,896,63 6.553,913 9,265.49l 1.27.644 600.669 875,71 1,918.13
14 Comon 25.31,020 13.523.841 3.340.464 3.6/5.9l1 1,164.865 2,598,29 395.353 418,220
15 T atal Uniform Cuneoi Cost 220,252.000 90,074.434 25,110,696 43,886032 15,611965 36,948.293 3.724.912 VJ95.468
Eicpressed as $/Wh
16 Produciio $0-3903 $0.04150 1004151 10038 $0,0362 $0,035'1 $003/65 SO 03311
17 rf80smsson $OOOfIO $0.00555 $O,Q0h!)$00051 SO 0031 $0.001 $000409 $0.00259
18 Dilfibuiio 10.0127 SO,01885 $0,02011 $0,01309 $0.000'J $0.00 $001490 $0,14390
19 Common $000126 $0,01164 SO,01033 .000541 $0,00311 10,0028 $000612 $00302
20 fotal Current Unitom MoIdH.alos $0.06316 SO,OIl56 SO 01'66 .00019l $0,04969 $O,04í.$0.06336 $0.21063
21 Rnvntle to COi' RI1io at Current Rates 100 0,96 111 1.06 0.93 0,91 1.1 098
Functonal Cost Components at Propoaed Retrn by Schedule
22 Producio 148.164,040 50.90,96 15.254.109 30,821909 12.615,16 35,66,30 2.528.03 480.123
23 TransmIsson 21.45.730 1.63M75 2.598,760 4.591.11 1,635.406 4,483.246 364,529 41.197
24 IJisliibutlon 55.171,601 26,040,6-/5 9,811,431 13,512,311 1.529.26 707,195 1.36,991 2.201.730
25 Como 26.03.629 14.06,481 3.661.00 4.214.062 1.214,90 2,790,262 436,87 429,950
26 Toiai Propc RßiO Revnui 251,495.00 98.631.00 31.326.000 53.14000 is.95,oo 43.63,00 4.699.00 3,153,00
~xprCSsed ß' $/kWh
2J Piooll $0.04248 $0,04363 $004718 .0,04363 $0-39 $0.0321 $0.04301 $0.03493
28 Transmison $0.0012 SO,OOI SO 00804 SO 00649 10.0061 $0,0094 $0,0020 $O.OO:i
29 DistribuliQn SO,01582 SO.02242 $0,03034 10.01908 $0,0048'1 $0,00078 $0.02329 $0.16016
30 Common $0.00769 $0.01210 $0.0112 SO 00695 .000361 $0.00307 $0.00743 $0.0128
31 lolal Prposoc Meldel Hales SO.0721 $0,0640 $0.09688 $00750 SO 05378 $0.0480 $0.07993 SO.22936
Functlonal Coat Component at Unifm Requested Return
32 ProductiOf 14.89.815 52.478.21 14.610,528 29.883.209 12.833,61l 35,192,041 2.401,403 50,637
33 TfansmiSsiOn 21.80,618 8,319,611 2.316,686 4.206.15 1,764.316 4.311,013 314.439 48,039
34 l)ilributon 55.401.201 28.47,276 8,66,992 12,308,195 1.646,165 691,120 1.69.879 2.476,913
35 Comm 26.897,30 14,365.86 3,:;8.53 4,118,200 1,237,80 2.762.468 420,116 444,392
36 lota! Unitoiin COSI 251,49500 103,611.96 29,142659 50,516.179 17,481.662 42.957.238 4,30,837 3.470,039
E,prossa .. $ikWh
37 PfOOVCion $u.4241 10,04'18 10045'9 SO 04221 SO 0408 SO.03876 SO,0408 $0.032
38 rtansmission SO.0810 10,00116 1000116 SOOO..94 $00052 $00015 SO.00535 $0,00349
39 IliSvibulion SO.01569 $0,02449 1002660 SO 0118 $0,0024 $0.0016 SO.0199 $0.18016
40 Common $o.oom 10.01i3 $0,01097 $0.0082 $00094 $0.0030 SO.00715 $0.03233
41 i ot UnifOfm Melòii Ral..$0,07211 $0.oo9iõ $009013 SOOl135 $001i $0.04732 $O,o324 10,25242
42 Reenue to Cosi R'llio al Propoi,oo Rales 1.00 0,95 10'1 1.05 0,97 102 1,09 0.91
43 CurrentRO'ue toPropo$ed Coit Ratio 0,38 0.63 0,98 0,92 0.33 0,38 0,93 0.2
File; 1009 Elec c. J r~e COS Ba,e Gase i SuniCOst Exhiiils Page 2 of 3
EXHIBIT 302
CASE Nos. A VU-E-09-lI A VU-G-09-I
D. PESEAU -CLEARWATER PAPER CORPORATION
PAGE 2 of3
EXhibil302
Dennis Peseau
Sul AVlSTA UTIIHIES Idaho JuriSdliOn
Scenario lran$miíoo 100 Ilm.n(¡",,,oo 10 Cost By CI.ssílicalin Summ.iy ElecncUlilly 01l141u~
AV\.E.(.01 Method For lhe livel"" Monlhs "ncoa Sop,ember 30. 2008
(b)(el (ai (ei (II (gi (hi (il OJ (kl (I)(m)fleslltrai GOO9f'"large Geri l;xlra Large Exira l.arge l'umping Slroe&
Sysiem Service SOfVico Servic Goo saCl Sorw I'llalh Sorvi Are.UghlS
Ilosnpton 101'"~h1 Soh 'I 11 sci 1172 se 2b sci 251 Sel,31.32 Sc4H9
Cost Clasiißcaüons at CUf(vnl Return by Schediile
Energy 112,619,088 37,009,369 11224,121 23960,616 9.50,219 26,35.16 2,(lIj,967 446,974
Ilernc 87954,690 35,m.354 12,524,638 22,121.41 5.051.00 10,2:,60 1.64.021 96,72
Costcxner 19,660,941 13,365,06 3,87Ij,28 621.938 6,661 950 369,541 1.430,57
i 01'" Curreni Rai\ Revnue 220,234.719 85.701.82 ïï615.049 46,72,995 14,562,950 38,581,192 Uro,549 2,86.203
Exprossed as Uriii Cosi
Energy S/Wh $0.032:SOml91 $0.03411 $003381 $0,03025 $0,0312 SO,03-62 $003214
Ilemand S/Wlmo $10.86 $11.36 $13,01 $11.11 .8.69 $7.45 $12.40 $23.19
Custor $/USIIm $13.62 $11.30 $109 $36.01 ,46,26 $19.13 ,23,29 ,958.14
Cost CII$IIßçaUons at Uniform Current Return
8 Energy 11,12,00 31,999,1I0 10,678,351 23,116,841 10,045,261 29,013,641 1,92,37 449,147
9 Deand 87.455,196 31,421,684 10,942,956 20.305,813 5,631.907 10.60,72 1.526,93 1.00,983
10 Cutor 19,689.19 13,9"06,195 3.396,945 501,09 6,663 1,057 30,539 1,457,29
II Tolal UoifOJm Cooefl Cot 720.252,000 69,383,649 24,916,252 43,96753 15,665,657 39,624,422 3,76,841 2,911,025
~xpfOssod as Urnl Cosl
12 Energy S/Wh ,003244 SO,0321 $00321 so 03265 $0,03197 $0.03196 SO,03m $0.0327
13 Ilmond S/Wimo ,10.80 117,04 $1131 11075 $9,69 $1,73 510,74 524.35
14 CutOfr $ICUSVI1 $1362 $1180 114.98 13167 $6016 56811 119,59 $976.9
15 Revenue to Cost RatiO at CurrntRates 100 0.96 111 1.06 0.93 0.9 1.1 0,98
Cosl Classifications at Prposed Retrn by Sol.dul.
16 Enory 113,663,296 40,166,816 12,046.468 26,025,546 10,66,6/2 32,013,119 2.214,13 467,91g
17 iiand 100.235,676 42,363,611 14,543.82ti 2(WO,OO9 6.300,316 12,38,942 2,08,611 1.22,033
16 CvsÌQ ?2&!1,292 15,316,461 4A68,21 ï9,123 10,961 1,&59 436,621 1.58,343
19 Tot'" Propoed Rate Hevue 251,540.265 97,869,156 31.08,525 53,244,68 16918,018 44.466,220 4.735,371 3,116,296
f.xpressed as Unit Cost
20 I:ocrgy $IkWh 10,03M6 1003458 10.0316 S003671j 10.03395 $0.0353 $003766 10.0304
21 Demand $lkWlmo $12.99 11363 $Hi,11 $199 $1063 $9.02 $14.66 $205
22 Cusr siCosvmo $15.66 $12,95 $19.19 $46.26 116.16 5129.95 526,28 $1.062.52
CO$t Clas,ifçalioni 11 Uniform Requested Return
23 En.rgy 12325,286 41.42&.408 11,531,916 25,7001)9 10,96,859 31,629,189 2.09'162 490,291
24 Demand 105,0/6,01 45.262,(¡5 13218.150 24,68,413 6,66,063 12,12.646 1.859,503 1,259,964
25 Cust 23,083,301 16,109,616 4,104,823 727,866 12,021 1,486 38,498 1.745,198
26 Tota Unffon Col 251.485,00 102.97,068 28,915,551 &0,614,618 1',56,96 43,754,324 4,33763 3.495,453
""".ssod as Unii Cost
27 ¡"orgy $IkWl Sl,03536 1003561 ,0,03567 10,03559 $0.03466 10.034&1 10.03567 $003567
28 l)o.nd $IkWlnio ,12.91 $14.56 113.19 113.01 $1136 18.63 ,13.08 130,37
29 Custome IICusumo $199 $1362 ,18.10 142.13 $83.48 $123,67 124.17 11,166,92
30 Rllflnulto Colt Ratio at Pfopoied Rates 1.00 0.95 107 105 091 1.02 1.09 0,91
31 Cwmtt RevClnUf: to PropondCo61 Rilío 0,88 0,83 0.96 0.92 0.83 0,88 0.96 0,82
File: ID 09 E~ ea.., EtéC COS Base ca, Sumcesl f,!llbilS Peg" 3 013
EXHIBIT 302
CASE Nos. A VU-E-09-11 A VU-G-69-1
D. PESEAU -CLEARWATER PAPER CORPORATION
PAGE 3 of3
EXHIBIT 303
Exhibit 303
Dennìs Peseau
Sumosl AVISTA UTILITIES Idah JvlÎsdiclion
Sceaiio: Tran 100 Dam.7 CI' IJ COSI 01 SIl~e Ilas Summ Ei",~ic Utiy 01n410
AVU.E.04-íl MeI1 ror ih Twelve Moth. Ended Scpicmber 3\, 2008
(b)(c) (dl (el in (gl (h)(il úl (kl (Q (mi
Residonlial Geneal LaigoGe.Exira large ExV.taiga Pu~lng Svøe&
Sy.tem seice Servce Sei Ge Scrv~e $iico "oUeleh Serv AreeL~hls
Oescripion Total Seh 1 Seh 11-17 Seh 21.22 Seh 25 Seh 2SP Sc 31.32 Seh 41.49
P1anllri Service
ProductonPli:373J311JOO 13/.814.008 38,598.4/6 73505.54 31.29.339 8S.147,907 6,049,140 1,31M83
Transmissior Plant 160.359.000 66.05,264 18.620,80 29,924,369 12,365.909 30.499.726 2.423,558 469,494
DistriblinPlani 391,018.00 19/.Ji.4U 61,5/1,178 91,364.301 10,13,997 2.156,602 8,513,166 19,320,328
Intanibl Planl 39,605.00 16.029,27 4,330.141 7.39/.100 l,97'J.703 /.967,"26 639,95 261,52
Geeral l~aI 61,118.000 32.914,434 8,160.17 921,195 2.737.457 8,165,961 96,327 1.022,849
T olal Plat In Sov~e 1.025,891.00 450.17,410 131)81.151 211.404,519 60.116.404 131,937,923 18.569,066 22.39.401
AccomOcprecìaion
7 PrOducton Plani (146,66/.00)153,813,954)(15.06/.218)128.915.114)112,32U62)(33,661.628)12.381.134)(520.571)
8 ltansmission Plant 155,770,[phone],843)(6,41,940)(10.07.162)(4,30,6431 (10,60,261)(842.810)(163.282)
9 l)i,uibutio. Plani (1I,m.ooO)(60,612.01)(1/.696.121 (18.258,437)(3,147.094)(689.459)(2.42,039)(8.68,042)
10 Intangible Plan!(6,50.000)(3,1:;.995)(824,8871 0.044.896)(346.4051 (835.799)(103,0311 (89,981
11 Go,oral!'I""1 116,764.001 114,39,315)(3,570,1561 (4,000,5661 (1,197.576)12.697.469 (421.4341 1447,44)
12 T Oial Accumuated Deprocialon 1357.147.0001 (155.067.619)143,63-.429)177,656.175)121.319,0991 148.491,616)(6,17.507)(9.80.354)
13 Nel Plant 668J44,000 295,103.590 67,646.823 136.748.344 38.797,305 63.446,306 12.41,578 12,o8,06
14 AccvinUlale Dele"od rlT (94,27.00)(41,094,174)111660,55/1 (19,117,531)15,716,646)(12,956,00)(1.677.664)(1,851.591
15 Miscelaneus Rae Base 1.967.000 639,422 247.30 761,762 334,339 920,471 53,290 10,416
16 folalRat iie 51/,434.000 254.648,236 76,033.566 110,391,569 33.41.996 71.410,717 10,19,00 10,742,910
17 Reeno l:roOl Reiail Rates 220,252.00 61.366,000 21,841,000 46,634.00 14.497,000 37.941.000 4,139.00 2.642,00
18 otiw OPeiiUng Reenues 32,908.00 12.477,617 3,020,643 6.491,425 1,651,776 7,047,613 537,180 180.146
19 Tota Roue.253,160.000 96.63ó.17 31.361.643 53,126,425 17.146,77 44,96,613 4,676.160 3.0ii./46
Opralì Expon.es
20 Productin Expenses 132,634.00 47.59.8S6 13.30,601 26,393,578 11310,148 31.365,742 2,179,468 465.367
21 lransmissio Expenses 8.346.00 3,436;118 969,359 1.657,80 643.74 1,587.761 126,165 24,41
n DiSlnbuli Expeses 9.626,00 4.628,56,1.334,788 1.266,359 315.69 68,906 183.439 618,75
13 Customer Acounting Expenses 3,464.00 2.511.225-566,133 159,263 37,127 96.15~44,220 9,676
24 CuslOar InformaHofl Expenses 1.537,00 682,508 17.575 254,626 107.223 291,627 23.466 4,775
25 Sales Expo_ 235.00 /6.937 2l97!.4a.21 20,661 60,270 3,99 S3
26 Admil\& General Expenses 21,605.00 11.314.861 2.864.061 3,420,128 1.006,230 2.276.906 34M93 374,261
27 T Oll OeM Exponses 17.469,00 70.307.691 19.23,;110 34.099,963 13.450.411 35,74'1.366 2.909,267 1.718.570
26 T.xo other Tha' Incme Taxes 6,751.000 3,66.37 1,066,611 1766.546 575.36 1.352,992 153,531 145,910
29 Olhef Income R~aled Items (106.00)(43.520)111,166)119,814)(6,196)(20,266)(1,60 1312)
~)fOC~ljon Expese
30 PIOOUC!i P1ani OepfOCia 9.335.00 3.46'r.477 971,596 1.630.13 71.921 2,104.662 150.469 32.536
31 r rWl$rnssiol) Plnt Ocpreiaii 3,13.00 1.331.29 3/5.296 603,119 249,231 614,115 48,648 9,463
32 Oi$lributio Pla,,1 Del"ecaliOl 10,048.000 4,96,162 1,601.64 1.459,029 30.210 51.900 226.162 436,121
33 General Plant OCPlccia~on 4,867.000 1,616.499 649.119 73.%3 21.776 490.531 76.637 61.373
34 Amortlläboo Expenso 2.156.000 633,441 m,454 443,35 16l.700 517.649 36,477 7,9~
35 lotai Deroiaton Expense 19.738.00 13.115,909 3.630.958 6.068,591 1.79.651 3.174,658 538.611 56.411
36 Income Tax 6.445.00 1,159.~27 1.670,660 1,54.9\9 102,066 6U.!ï/5 254.301 82.851
37 TOlI 0pa/in9 Ex"""..12i.97.oo 86.307.976 ~J:t9'.695 44.465.304 15.659.170 41.462,301 3,654,106 2,516,441
36 Neilncme 30,863.000 10,527.639 5.569,949 8,641.m 1.169.606 3.006,306 611,073 50,30
39 Hate of Return 534%413%1.33%718'3.66'4 4.91%7.62%4.71011
40 f\eurn Halio 100 0'1 1.37 1.34 0.71 0.92 1.43 0.6l
41 ¡omst Exposc 19,055,000 8403.250 1.50,065 3,971,a66 1.101.610 2,366,\4 356,163 354.510
rile II) 09 Elee Casol Elee COS Base eas.1 Stirt hhlM.Page 1 of 3
EXHIBIT 303
CASE Nos. A VU-E-09-11 A VU-G-09-1
D. PESEAU -CLEARWATER PAPER CORPORATION
PAGE 1 of3
Exhibil303
Denni Peseau
Sumcst AVISTA UTIIJllfS Idaho Jundiciio
$cOl.no, TranS 100% Oem./cPDe HcvetlJG' 10 Co by Functinai CompOIlCft Sumary F~c~ICUmjly 0111405
AVU.I,.04.01 Melhod 1'0' II TI'æIWl Mont, 1,,,00 S'Plember 30. 2008
(b)(e) (d) (el II)(9)(hi Iii m (k)lQ 1m)
Resjdenlial Gcal Lag. Goo Extalarg.E,~. lar Pung $tle.l&
System Service Sevic So/vio Gen Service Servic~ Potih Service Aroa lights
OcscNplin Tolal So I Sch 11.12 Soh 21.22 Sch25 Seh 251'So 31.32 So 41-9
Functional Cost Components at Current Return by SchedulePioduction135.850,617 41.358,891 14,30,253 28.30.3!i 11.79,927 31.802,900 2,358.732 489,586
r ransmis$ioo 16,257,155 5,026.2%2.193.79 3,559.547 1,103,620 3,023,268 297,929 45,628
Distribution 42,915,00 19,642,90 1.84,650 10.836.33 1,1\0,/9 583,882 1,067,540 1.868,39
Comm 25,221J.4 13,32,905 3.497.416 3,937.66 1.02,461 2,530,950 414,799 418,416
Toi81 CurrcntRale I~eveiluo 220.252,00 66,358,00 71,641,000 45,634,000 14.497,00 37,941.00 4,139,00 2.W.000
Exp..oo as S/
6 Prouclion $0.03695 $0.04077 $0.04441 $0.03997 $0.03558 $003503 $0.04012 $0.0351
7 T ransmissÎQn $0.00466 $000519 $0.0080 $0.00503 SM0351 $0.00333 $0.007 $O.OOJJ
8 l)jslnbulloo $00121 $0.01691 $0.02406 $0.01531 $O.OOO'$0.000 SO 01816 $0.13737
9 Commn $00012 S00114/$0.01062 SO.005 $0.00351 $0.0079 SM07Ø SO.0304
10 1 oii Culf'''' M.ióe Ra $006316 $0.0/435 $008610 $006567 $004614 $0.04119 SO.07040 SO,2074
Functnal C01t-Components-ltUnlform Curnt Return
II Pructin 13&,106.106 48,653"33 13,&W.312 27,08,878 11,601.260 32.166.219 2,235.22 496,784
12 T ransmlsion 16,382,662 6,69,384 1.665.5/0 3,lY12466 1.27.819 3.161,4'3 246,616 46,335
13 Distributio 42,444.209 21,906.159 lH!;1,10&9.259.27 1,270.51 596,193 87û,38 1,978.623
14 Co~25,31/.020 13.62,229 3,3/5.604 3,613,021 1.33,193 2,552,994 396,?9 423,\66
16 Total Unitom Cu'OII Co.i nO,252.00 91.0732%25.4l1091 43,233,642 15.283.786 38,478,819 3J68.46Š 2,945,926
Expressed as S/kWh
16 Production $0.03903 $0.04106 $O.04m $0036io SO.03696 SO.03543 $0.0382 $0,03614
17 lransmissio $0.00470 $0,00516 $00053 $00034 10.00405 10.00348 10,00423 SO.00362
18 DiSltibullor SO.OI21 $0.01800 $001.28 $O.Q:i $0.00404 $0.00 $(01490 $0.14393
19 Co 10Wiio 10.0117 $001044 $0.00539 $0.001 $0.00281 $0.00678 $0.03078
io 10lat Curronl Uniform Meló Ilal,$0.0616 $0.07641 $00/679 $006106 $O.04š65 $004238 $00639 $0.21437
21 Revenue to Cost R.lio at Current Rates 100 0.95 1.09 106 0.95 099 1.0 0.96
Functional Cost Components at Proposed Return bySch"~lllt
22 Productio 146,461.236 5l.H137 15.395,053 3O,616,:i 12,482.518 35.682,809 2,540.459 510.8M
23 '!iansmissio 21.425,662 lJ5~.564 2.66,252 4,492.147 1,616,553 4,47295 370,536 53,66
24 Ditribun 54.805,J5 25.539,063 9,594.00 13.654,5/7 1,597,80 714,725 1.349,358 2,155,833
25 Common 26,mJ44 14,089,235 3.676,695 4,17.966 1,195,129 1,164.516 436,647 43,553
26 Totl Proed Halo flo'lon".251.465,000 98.37.00 31,326.00 53.140.000 16,696,00 43,635,00 4.699.00 3,153,000
txpros,oo .. $IkWh
27 PrQÓuclio $0.04258 10.04412 10.04161 $0.0435 $0.03973 100330 $0.04321 $00371
26 L ransmisioo SO.0014 $0.0066 $000823 $00034 $0.0015 $00093 $M063O $0.00390
29 Oislribulion $0.0\572 $0.02199 $0.0296/$0.0195/$0,00 $000079 $0.0225 $0.15662
30 Common $0.00766 10.01213 $0.0113 $000590 $000381 $0.00305 $0.00746 $0.03147
31 T ola P,opo'ed Molded Ral.,$0.01211 10.0649'$0.09666 $0.07505 $0.05376 10.0480 $0.07993 10.22936
Functional Cost Componcntsat Uniform Reque$led Return
32 Produciio 14,699,615 53.178.41 14.66/,16/29,425,961 12.60.55/34,663,043 2,424,922 536.704
33 lransmissio 21.280,576 8,616.005 2.425.381 4.012.920 1.66.900 4.11,672 324,400 63314
34 Oisiribubon 55.407.201 28,45/,201 6,6'0,531 12,301'/11 1.642.904 687.055 1,170.213 2.47.464
3!J Commn 26,691.300 14,466,190 3,585.228 4.052,1i3 1.2I.B43 1715.31 423,466 449,559
36 lOlal Uniform Cosi 251.465.000 104,71.918 29.546,433 49,193,27 17.116.204 42.m.08 4.343,020 3,527,061
Exptsoo as $4W1
37 Productin $00424 $0.04576 ~0498 1004t!ì SO 04012 $003840 $0.0415 10.03904
38 lrarimissMm $0.00610 $00014 SO.00750 $0.001 $0.0031 1000460 $0.0052 $().0461
39 DiI(ib\JliblI 10.01589 $0.02450 $0.02682 SO.0177 10.005?3 $0.00016 $0.01990 $0,16022
40 Con SO.OO77 $OO124Ó $0.01109 $0.0051 $0.0036 $000199 $0.0072 $0.03270
41 10lat Unifm Melde Halo,10.01211 $009016 $0.09139 1007033 $0.05449 $0.04674 $0.01361 $O.2!i'
42 Rovonue 10 CO$l Ratio at PropOl,d Rate. 1.00 094 1.06 107 099 103 1,00 0.89
43 CUffent Rtv6nue loPropo'&ed Cost Ratio 0.68 0,82 0,94 0,94 0,85 0,89 0,95 0.61
Fil.: 1009 i,io C.se 1 EI.. COS BaoC... ISumoo.! Exhibits Page 2 of3
EXHIBIT 303
CASE Nos. A VU-E-09-11 A VU-G-Ø9-1
D. PESEAU -CLEARWATER PAPER CORPORATION
PAGE 2 of3
, ,
Exhibil30
Denrus Pesea
Su..1 AvlsrA lHillTES Idaho JurisdhOß
Sc~erio: I fa.. 100% oe . 7 CP oe Revue to Cot By Classifialioo Summar~ElecicUliil 01n4105
AVU.E.04.01 Melho 'or lhe Twel.. Month' EndO Sepembc 30, 1lOO
Ibl Ic) lui iei m (9)(h)(I)(j (k)(I)1m)
Hesidenlial Geneal largoCO Extralaige Exlr lare Pumpin9 Sirel&Sy,ic So~e Service SUO/ico Gen Seriie Soic l'ollllh ScrYi AralighlsIlriplillrollSoh 1 Seh 11.12 Soh 71.n Sch25 Sch 251'Scl 31.37 Seh 41.49
Cost Classifcation, .1 Currant Return by Schedu~
Erir¡y 11,940,111 36,816,22 11.32,19,24.191,470 9,6ö6.8ö4 28,6,9,30 2,036,252 442,413
OemalU 87,914,9M 34'121,320 12.19.471 22,577,259 ,,114,061 10.404,633 1,743,431 964,770
Customr 19.429,029 13,212,218 3,808.04.640,726 I,m 999 354,591 1.45,225
Tola Cur",~iiiai. Rcl'oo nO,294,667 84.49,7:17,239.713 47.415.456 14.878,139 3906,937 4,134,274 2,812.409
Expresse as Unìl Cost
EI\9Y IIWh $0,0338 $0,03170 $0.3443 $0,0041 $0,03074 SO 03157 $0,03464 $0,00218
Demand $/W/mo $10,86 $11.7 $11.8 $11.J5 $897 S7,58 $1226 $23,20
Customr SlCusVmo 1134.$11.11 S16.9 $37,09 $5016 $8.26 $22.9 $941,21
COGI Classifcations at Uniform Curre Réturt
8 e""9Y 113,11,00 37.99.70 10,518,351 13,116.841 10,04(;,287 29,013,641 1,923,312 449,74/
9 Demand 87,45(;,196 37,427,il 10,941,955 1O,3Oó,13 5,631,901 10,609,724 1.526,930 1,009,983
10 CulomOi 19,669.795 13,9o6,195 3,395,946 541,099 8,663 1.057 30.539 1,57.~11 Total Uniform Currenl Cot 226,252.000 89,383.849 24.918.257 43,969,753 15,685,657 39,624,422 3,752.641 2,911.026
Expressod as Unit Co
11 Energy $/kWh $003144 $00327 $0.0027 $003265 $0,03197 $0.03196 $0,0327 $0,0321213OendIIWl$10.80 $11.04 $1137 $1015 $9,69 $1.3 $10.74 $24.35
14 Custom,.SlCusVmo $1362 $1180 $14,96 $31.67 $6,16 $8,11 $19,59 $976.09
15 Revenue to Cost Ratio at Cutront Rate$100 0,95 109 1.06 0.95 0,99 1.0 0,96
Cost Cla$$iflcations at Proposed Return by Sçhedule
16 Energy 124,046,222 39,899.393 11,946,666 2(,2(4,515 10,641,17 32.425.944 2,202,35 464,1431,1 Demand '05,22,736 41,17,316 14,199.364 1.6.922,309 6.66,09 12,564.811 2.062,034 1.098,18318Cu,loi 22.368,311 15,150,363 4.414,132 619,827 11,614 '.61/431,191 1,55;566
19 r etl Proed Hate iinue 151,662,270 95,871074 30,662,10 54.00,652 11,34o.68 45,012,37 4,695,583 3,ii.497
Exprosseo as Unil Col
20 Erigy SlkWh $003557 $0,03435 $0.036%$0,03710 $0.03451 $0.03572 $0.03746 $0,0337621Demand$IkWllno S199 $1344 $1485 $14.25 $1116 $917 $14,50 $2649
12 Cusloei $JIISVmo $15.51 $12,81 $19.46 $4746 $&.65 $134.77 $17.93 $1.044.59
Cost Classification, at Uniform Requeated Return
23 Energy 17.325,266 41,425.08 11,531,978 25,20,799 10,950,859 31,629,189 2,09,767 490.21
24 iiømane'105.76,407 45.262,04(;13,7.8750 24,686,413 6,60,083 12,123,648 1.859,50 1.259.964
25 Custo 23,063.301 16,109,616 4,104,623 72,66 12,011 1,486 382.496 1,145,19626lOlOI Unilor Cot 261,465,0(102.19,06 26,915,551 50,614,676 17.56,96 43,754,324 4,338,763 3,495,453
E,presseQ as lJi1 Cosl
27 EfIY SlWh $0.03536 $O.oo61 $0.00507 $003559 $0.03466 $0.03484 $0.0357 $0,03728DomalUIIWlmo$12.9 $14,50 $13.19 S13.07 $1\36 $8,63 $13.06 $30.3729CustorSlusVmo$15.99 $13.62 $16.10 $42.13 $63.48 $ln87 $24.1 $1.16692
30 Rev,nue to CO$I Rao ii PropoudRates 100 0,94 106 107 0,99 103 1.06 0,89
31 Currnt Revenue to Proposed Cost Raio 0.68 0,82 0.94 8.94 0,85 0.89 0.95 0.80
Filc'ILL 09 Ele Cas. i fle COS Ba Ca..' Sume.., i;xh;bi~Page 3 of 3
EXHIBIT 303
CASE Nos. A VU-E-09-I/ A VU-G-09-1
D. PESEAU -CLEARWATER PAPER CORPORATION
PAGE 3 of3