Case No. PAC-E-05-7, Order No. 29869

September 16, 2005

Contact: Gene Fadness (208) 334-0339




Utah Power, Idaho Falls Power submit revised application


Boise – Utah Power and Idaho Falls Power submitted a revised application to the Idaho Public Utilities Commission outlining how customers in overlapping areas will be served.


Commission staff opposed an original application from the two utilities because it had the potential of creating duplicate facilities in contradiction of the state Electric Suppliers Stabilization Act (ESSA).


Idaho Falls Power, a municipal utility, serves customers primarily within the city limits of Idaho Falls, but it also has customers outside city limits. PacifiCorp, which does business as Utah Power in eastern Idaho, serves customers primarily outside city limits but does have some consumers within Idaho Falls city limits.


The proposed agreement states Utah Power will no longer provide electric service to new customers within Idaho Falls and the city will not provide service to new customers outside its municipal boundaries. The agreement does not affect existing customers who will continue to be served by their current provider no matter their location.


Commission staff disagreed with a section of the agreement dealing with annexed areas. The original proposal stated that when the city annexed property served by Utah Power, the city could agree to provide electric service to a Utah Power customer if that customer made a written request to the city. Commission staff objected, citing the potential for some annexed areas that would have both Utah Power and City of Idaho Falls customers.


 The revised application requires the city to either serve every customer in a newly annexed parcel or to serve no customers in the parcel.


ESSA allows electric suppliers to contract with each other for the purpose of allocating territory, consumers and future consumers. However, the commission must approve the allocation agreements. The commission approves the contracts based on the finding that the allocation or transfer is consistent with the purposes of ESSA, which are to: 1) promote harmony between electric suppliers, 2) prohibit the “pirating” of consumers, 3) discourage the duplication of electric facilities, 4) actively supervise the conduct of electric suppliers, and 5) stabilize the territories and consumers served by electric providers.


The commission is taking comments through Oct. 6 on the revised proposal. Comments are accepted via e-mail by accessing the commission’s homepage at and clicking on "Comments & Questions." Fill in the case number (PAC-E-05-7) and enter your comments. Comments can also be mailed to P.O. Box 83720, Boise, ID 83720-0074 or faxed to (208) 334-3762.


A full text of the commission’s order, along with other documents related to this case, are available on the commission’s Web site. Click on “File Room” and then on “Electric Cases” and scroll down to the case number.