2013 Utah Public Service Commission Annual Report

8/13/2019 2013 Utah Public Service Commission Annual Report

1/52

Public Service Commission2013 Annual Report

for the period July 1, 2012 - June 30, 2013

Electricity Natural GasTelecommunications Water

P S C

2 0 1 3


2/52

PSC 2013 Annual Report

2 | PSC

S A E OF U AHPublic Service Commission

Honorable Gary HerbertGovernor, State o UtahHonorable Members o the Utah State SenateHonorable Members o the Utah State House o Representatives

It is a pleasure to present to you the Annual Report or scal year 2013 o thePublic Service Commission o Utah. Tis report has been prepared in accordancewith Utah Code 54-1-10, which requires the Commission to submit to you areport o its activities during the scal year ending June 30, 2013.

Tis annual report highlights the issues and activities the Commission has ocusedon during the year.

We look orward to your continued support as we serve the citizens o Utah.

Respect ully submitted,Ron Allen, Commission Chairman

David Clark, Commissioner

Tad LeVar, Commissioner


3/52


3 | PSC

able o ContentsLetter to the Governor, Members o the Senate and Members o the House o Representatives

Public Service Commission Personnel ...................................................................................... 4

PSC Organization Chart .............................................................................................................. 5

Commissioners ............................................................................................................................. 6 Ron Allen Chairman David Clark Commissioner Tad LeVar Commissioner

History o the Public Service Commission o Utah & Regulatory Process ........................... 7

Overview o Electric Utilities .................................................................................................... 11 Electric Dockets

Electric Utility Companies

Overview o Natural Gas Utilities ............................................................................................. 23

Natural Gas Dockets Natural Gas Utility Companies

Overview o elecommunications Utilities ............................................................................. 33 elecommunications Dockets Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers ......................................................................... 35 Competitive Local Exchange Carriers .......................................................................... 37 elecommunications Relay Services and Equipment Distribution Program ....... 41

Overview o Water Utilities ....................................................................................................... 49 Water Dockets Water Utility Companies

Complaint Resolution ................................................................................................................ 51


4/52


5/52


6/52


6 | PSC

C o m m i s s i o n e r s

Ron Allen - Chairman Appointed as Chair: January 1, 2013

Ron Allen was appointed to thePublic Service Commission on March18, 2005, and was reappointed onMarch 18, 2011 or an additional six-year term. Commissioner Allen wasappointed as Chair on January 1, 2013.Prior to his appointment he served as aUtah State Senator representing Mag-na, West Valley and Stansbury Park.While in the Utah Senate he served asMinority Whip and on the Executive

Appropriations and Executive Man-agement Committees. Chairman Allenalso served on the Utah ax ReviewCommission and on the PrivatizationReview Board. In addition, he servedon the Energy and Electric UtilitiesCommittee or the National Con er-ence o State Legislatures. ChairmanAllen currently serves on the GasCommittee with the National Associ-ation o Regulatory Utility Commis-sioners. Chairman Allen is ormerly asel -employed business and technologyconsultant and has owned and operat-ed several Utah businesses, making thelist o Utahs 100 astest growing rmsseveral times. Chairman Allen has aB.S. degree in Accounting and an M.A.degree in Art History rom the Univer-sity o Utah.

David Clark Appointed: January 1, 2013

David Clark was appointed to thePublic Service Commission on Jan-uary 1, 2013. At the time o his ap-pointment, he had been serving as theCommissions legal counsel since 2010. During a 22 year legal careerin Cali ornia, David represented ener-gy and telecommunications utilities inadministrative hearings, and prac-ticed corporate law or a public utilityholding company, serving as manager

o the companys Legal Division. Hebegan his law practice as a member othe United States Navy Judge AdvocateGenerals Corps. More recently, David ound-ed a nancial services business in thebanking sector, serving clients in thewestern United States. He also spentthree years in ull-time, volunteerchurch service. Davids other commu-nity activities have included serviceon the boards o the San Diego UrbanLeague, the Poway Center or thePer orming Arts Foundation, the SanDiego Cystic Fibrosis Foundation, andthe San Diego Chapter o the J. ReubenClark Law Society. David received hisundergraduate and law degrees romBrigham Young University.

Tad LeVar Appointed: January 1, 2013

had LeVar was appointed to hisrst term as a Commissioner o thePublic Service Commission o Utahby Governor Gary Herbert on January1, 2013. He had been with the UtahDepartment o Commerce since 2004,and was the agency's deputy director. His previous experienceincludes service as the director o theDivision o Consumer Protection, ad-ministrative law judge at the Division,

and associate general counsel or theUtah Office o Legislative Research anGeneral Counsel. Be ore law school,Tad taught in secondary schools inexas and Arkansas. He is a graduateo the J. Reuben Clark Law School atBrigham Young University.


7/52


7 | PSC

H i s t o r y

O R I G I N S O F T H E P S C

Since its origin under the Public Utilities Act o 1917, the Commissionhas served the citizens o Utah through technical and economic regulationo the states public utility companies. Tese privately owned but govern-ment regulated companies provide the telecommunications, electricity,natural gas, water, and sewerage systems through which important serviceare delivered to Utah households and businesses.

Utility systems are key structuralelements o Utahs economy. Collec-tively, all such structural elements,whether provided by public author-ities or regulated private companies,

are known as in rastructure. Roads,railways, and other modes o transpor-tation, and communications and othernetwork-based services like electricity,natural gas, and water, acilitate theow o goods and services betweenbuyers and sellers, making this in ra-structure a prerequisite or economicgrowth.

Utility companies are certicatedmonopolies. With recent exceptions,primarily in the telecommunicationsindustry, each utility is the sole pro- vider o utility service in a designatedgeographic area o the State calledcerticated service territory.

Because there is no competition, eder-al and state law obligates the Commis-sion to promote and protect the publicinterest by ensuring that public utilityservice is adequate in quality and reli-

ability, and is available to everyone at just and reasonable prices. Tis is theCommissions goal. Te prices, termsand conditions o utility service affectthe quality o the States in rastructure.

Organization o the RegulatoryFunction in Utah oday Since 1983, when the legislaturelast reorganized Utahs public utility

regulatory unction, the Commissionhas been an independent entity witha small clerical, legal, and technicaladvisory staff. Te Office o theCommission consists o a three-member commission, each

commissioner appointed by the Gov-ernor to a six-year term, an adminis-trative secretary and clerical staff, anexecutive staff director and technicalstaff, a legal counsel and paralegal

staff, and an administrative law judge.Currently the Commission employsseventeen ull-time and three part-time employees.

Te Division o Public Utilities, withinthe Utah Department o Commerce,per orms public utility audits andinvestigations, helps resolve customercomplaints, and en orces CommissionOrders. Since the 1983 reorganizationthe Division has been empowered torepresent an impartially-determined,broad public interest be ore theCommission.


8/52


8 | PSC

Te Division employs a Director anda clerical and technical staff o ap-proximately thirty people and receiveslegal assistance rom the Office o theAttorney General. Also unctioningwithin the Department o Commerceis the Office o Consumer Services( ormerly the Committee o ConsumerServices), the state agency advocate be-ore the Commission or the interestso residential, small commercial, andagricultural customers. Te Office,established by the legislature in 1977,consists o six citizens appointed bythe Governor. It employs a directorand a ve-member clerical and tech-nical staff including legal assistanceprovided by the Office o the AttorneyGeneral.

How the Commission Works

As a regulatory decision-making body,the Commission exercises a delegatedlegislative power. Each regulatory de-cision is reached quasi-judicially thatis to say, the decision must be based onevidence o record gathered in openpublic hearings in docketed proceed-ings. All dockets are closely scheduled,but the due process rights o parties,care ully observed by the Commission,govern their timing.

In the course o a hearing, partiesparticipating may include the subjectpublic utility, the Division o PublicUtilities, and the Office o ConsumerServices. Parties present the sworntestimony and evidence o expertwitnesses on matters at issue andwitnesses are cross-examined by theattorneys assisting each party.

In cases where tens o millions odollars may be at stake or importantissues o regulatory policy arise, anumber o other interveners repre-senting interests as diverse as lowincome customers, environmentalgroups, and large industrial cus-tomers may also participate. Teytoo will employ expert witnessesand attorneys. Tey will want to beinvolved because regulatory decisionsdistribute outcomes as gains or lossesto particular parties. Cases raiseissues o law, economics, accounting,nance, engineering, and servicequality.

Reaching decisions which balance theofen-competing interests o con-cerned parties in pursuit o outcomeswhich protect and promote the overallpublic interest is the Commissionstask. Tese decisions, reviewed by theUtah Supreme Court, must be drawndirectly rom the evidentiary recordcreated in open public hearings or ledon the public record.

During scal year 2013, 418 caseswere opened and docketed and 303orders were sent out. O these, 45were resolved by written Commissionorder, ollowing hearing and delibera-tion on the evidentiary record. Manyo the remaining cases were handledin ormally. Te more involved cas-es, whether or regulatory policy ornancial implications, are highlightedin the ollowing discussions o electric-ity, natural gas, telecommunications,and water. In Fiscal Year 2013, thePublic Service Commission regulated176 utility companies to include gas,electric, telephone, water, sewer, and

railways with gross intrastate revenueso $3.27 billion.


9/52


9 | PSC

Years o Service Name Home own1917-21 Henry H. Blood Kaysville1917-23 Joshua Greenwood Nephi1917-25 Warren Stoutner Salt Lake City

1921-23 Abbot R. Heywood Ogden1923-37 Elmer E. Corfman Salt Lake City1923-37 Thomas E. McKay Huntsville1925-33 George F. McGonagle Salt Lake City1933-35 Thomas H. Humphreys Logan1935-37 Joseph S. Snow St. George1937-41 Ward C. Holbrook Clearfeld

1937-41 Otto A. Wiesley Salt Lake City1937-40 Walter K. Granger Cedar City1941-43 George S. Ballif Provo1941-49 Oscar W. Carlson Salt Lake City1941-51 Donald Hacking Price1943-52 W.R. McEntire Huntsville1949-73 Hal S. Bennett Salt Lake City1951-56 Stewart M. Hanson Salt Lake City1952-72 Donald Hacking Price1956-57 Rue L. Clegg Salt Lake City1957-63 Jesse R. Budge Salt Lake City1963-65 Raymond W. Gee Salt Lake City1965-67 D. Frank Wilkins Salt Lake City1967-69 Donald T. Adams Monticello1969-72 John T. Vernieu Richfeld

1972-75 Eugene S. Lambert Salt Lake City1972-76 Frank S. Warner Ogden1973-79 Olof E. Zundel Brigham City1975-76 James N. Kimball Salt Lake City1976-77 Joseph C. Folley Ogden1976-82 Milly O. Bernard Salt Lake City1977-80 Kenneth Rigtrup Salt Lake City1979-85 David R. Irvine Bountiful1980-89 Brent H. Cameron Salt Lake City1982-95 James M. Byrne Salt Lake City1985-92 Brian T. Stewart Farmington1989-91 Stephen F. Mecham Salt Lake City1991-92 Stephen C. Hewlett* Salt Lake City

1992-95 Stephen C. Hewlett Salt Lake City1992-2003 Stephen F. Mecham Salt Lake City1995-2005 Constance B. White Salt Lake City1995-2001 Clark D. Jones Salt Lake City2001-2012 Richard M. Campbell Riverton2003-2012 Theodore Boyer Salt Lake City2005-Present Ronald Allen Stansbury2013-Present David Clark Draper 2013-Present Thad LeVar Tooele*Commissioner Pro Tempore

Public Service Commission o UtahCommissioners

Public Service Commission o UtahSecretaries

Years o Service Name Home own1917-23 Tomas E. Banning Salt Lake City 1923-35 Frank L. Ostler Salt Lake City

1935-36 Teodore E. Tain Logan1936-38 Wendell D. Larson Salt Lake City 1938-40 J. Allan Crockett Salt Lake City 1941-43 Charles A. Esser Salt Lake City 1943-44 Teodore E. Tain Logan1945-48 Royal Whitlock Gunnison1949-49 C.J. Stringham Salt Lake City 1949-56 Frank A. Yeamans Salt Lake City 1956-59 C.R. Openshaw, Jr. Salt Lake City 1959-60 Frank A. Yeamans Salt Lake City 1960-70 C.R. Openshaw, Jr. Salt Lake City 1970-71 Maurice P. Greffoz* Salt Lake City 1971-72 Eugene S. Lambert Salt Lake City 1972-77 Ronald E. Casper Salt Lake City 1977-79 Victor N. Gibb Orem1979-81 David L. Stott Salt Lake City 1981-83 Jean Mowrey Salt Lake City 1983-86 Georgia Peterson Salt Lake City 1986-91 Stephen C. Hewlett Salt Lake City 1991-2011 Julie P. Orchard Bounti ul2012-Present Gary L. Widerburg Ogden*Acting Secretary


10/52


11/52


11 | PSC

E U O

he principal electric utility regulated by the Commission is PaciCorp, who does business in Utah as RockMountain Power. PaciCorp is an investor-owned utility serving approximately 800,000 residential, commercand industrial customers in Utah. PaciCorp also serves retail customers in ve other western states and whol

sale customers throughout the west. PaciCorp provides approximately 80 percent o the electricity to Utahhomes and businesses. Other Utah customers are served either by municipal utilities, which are not regulated bthe Commission, or by rural electric cooperatives or electric service districts, which are subject to minimal staregulation. Tus, most o the Commissions work in the electric industry arises rom regulation o PaciCorp.

Rate Changes Under Utah Code Annotated 54-4-4, the Commission is responsibleor determining just and reason-

able rates or PaciCorp. Utah lawenables the Commission to approverate changes reecting the outcomeo a general rate case in which costsassociated with the generation,transmission, and distribution oelectricity are evaluated. In addition,the Commission has the authority toapprove rate adjustments reectingcosts associated with the installationo major acilities in between gen-eral rate cases, the implementationo approved demand-side manage-ment/energy efficiency programs,energy balancing accounts, and theunding o low income assistanceprograms. In scal year 2013, theCommission approved ve ratechanges which resulted in an approximate 5.5 percent in-crease in the annual bill o a typical residential customer.

General Rate Case In February 2012, PaciCorp led an application requestingauthority to increase its retail rates in Utah by an amounto $172.3 million, an approximate 9.7 percent increase inUtah revenues. Te request was based on the orecast testperiod ending May 31, 2013, a thirteen-month average ratebase with a historical base period and a return on equity o10.2 percent. Capital investment in power plant emissioncontrols and transmission and distribution in rastructure,

along with increases in power costswere listed as the driving actorsbehind the proposed increase.

In a September 19, 2012 Report and

Order, the Commission approved amulti-year, uncontested settlementstipulation which resolved issues inthe General Rate Case docket andtwo other dockets concerning de-erred accounting o costs at Paci-Corps Carbon and Naughton powerplants. Te stipulation addressedall components o the three dock-ets including revenue requirement,revenue spread to classes o customers, rate design, and certain de erredaccounting treatment. Te Commis-sion authorized a 7.68 percent rateo return on rate base, based in parton an allowed9.8 percent rate o return on com-mon equity.

Te rate increase was implemented in two steps. In Step 1,the Commission increased PaciCorps annual revenue re-quirement by $100 million effective October 12, 2012. Tisrepresents a 5.64 percent increase in PaciCorps orecasto general business revenue in Utah and is an approximate5.23 percent increase in a typical residential customersannual bill. In Step 2, the Commission approved an increaso PaciCorps annual revenue requirement by $54 million,conditionally effective September 1, 2013.Tis representsa 2.88 percent increase in PaciCorps orecast o gen-eral business revenue in Utah.


12/52


12 | PSC

Te Commission allocated approximately thirty-nine per-cent o the revenue increase to residential customers andsixty-one percent o the revenue increase to commercial andindustrial customers. Te Commission also implemented anew two-tier pricing structure or non-summer rates.

In this case, the Commission approved de erred accountingtreatment or: (1) certain changes in depreciation expense,(2) costs related to the decommissioning o the Carboncoal-red power plant, (3) certain changes to wheelingrevenue, and (4) costs related to environmental air qualityupgrades to the Naughton coal-red power plants Unit 3.

Te Commission also approved the base levels o net powercost and wheeling revenue or energy balancing accountmeasurement as well as renewable energy credit revenuecontained in general rates. Te Commission approvedcertain accounting treatment related to the amortization outure approved balancing account charges or re unds. TeCommission also authorized the Company to retain tenpercent o certain renewable energy credit revenue incre-mental to the approved base level.

Solar Incentive Program

In October 2012, the Commission approved a new Solar In-centive Program, providing nancial support to those cus-tomers who purchase and install solar photovoltaic systems.Te Commission ound the program to be cost effective anddetermined it will yield net savings to customers over theprograms li e. Te new program is based on a ve-year pilotprogram originally approved in 2007.

Te programs central eature is a rebate incentive payableto customers who success ully complete an approved PVproject. Te program will provide approximately $50 mil-lion in rebate incentives to qualied applicants over the li eo the program (calendar year 2013 through calendar year2017). Potential program applicants are classied into threesectors: (1) residential or systems up to our kilowatts incapacity, (2) small non-residential or systems up to twen-ty-ve kilowatts in capacity, and (3) large non-residentialor systems ranging between 25-1,000 kilowatts.

PaciCorp uses a lottery to select applications romeach o the three sectors. I the available capacity orthe year is over-subscribed, additional applicants willbe placed on a waiting list in the order selected.

I available capacity or the year is not ully subscribed aferthe lottery, PaciCorp will accept additional applications ona rst come, rst served basis.

Electric Energy Conservation

In 2003, the Commission approved Electric Service Schedule No. 193, the Demand Side Management (DSM) CostAdjustment, the unding source or cost effective energyefficiency and load management programs approved bythe Commission and managed by PaciCorp. In scal year2013, PaciCorp spent approximately $44.8 million orsixteen energy efficiency and load management programs.Tese programs help reduce load and improve energyefficiency in new and existing homes and non-residentialbuildings and processes, encourage the purchase o ener-gy-efficient appliances, and directly control air conditionerand irrigation pumps. During 2012, approximately 192

megawatts o power and approximately 236,000 megawatthours o energy were saved through these programs.

On March 1, 2013, the Commission approved a rate de-crease by changing the Electric Service Schedule No. 193DSM Cost Adjustment Credit rate. Without this change, theDSM de erral account would have accumulated excessiveyear-end balances over collected unds. Tis adjustmentresulted in a $13 million re und which reduced a typicalresidential customers annual bill by about .31 percent.

Energy Balancing Account

Also on March 1, 2013, the Commission approved a $7.8million rate increase to recover the October through De-cember 2011 Energy Balancing Account de erred balancerom customers. Te increase, resulting rom an uncontest-ed settlement stipulation, will be recovered rom customersover a two-year period, in the amount o $3.9 million peryear. Tis results in an approximate .22 percent increase in aresidential customers annual bill.

Renewable Energy Credit Balancing Account

In a May 29, 2013 Report and Order, the Commis-sion approved an interim rate change by creditingthe Electric Service Schedule No. 98 REC RevenuesCredit Balancing Account by an amount o $3,263,53effective June 1, 2013. Tis resulted in a slight increasein customer rates since the prior credit was higher.Tis rate change resulted in a .01 percent increase in atypical residential customers bill.


13/52


13 | PSC

Planning or Least Cost and Reliable Power

Te Commission requires PaciCorp to le an integratedresource plan (IRP) describing its plan to supply andmanage growing demand or electricity in its six-stateservice territory or the next twenty years. In April 2013,PaciCorp led its 2013 IRP.

Based on its assumptions o existing generation capacity,length o existing purchase power contracts, and transmis-sion trans er capability, the 2013 IRP identied a deciencybetween existing resources and peak system requirementsplus a thirteen percent planning reserve o 824 megawattsbeginning in 2013. Tis decit will grow to 2,308 megawattsin 2022. Over the period 2013 to 2022, the system peak loadis orecast to grow at a compounded annual rate o about1.2 percent, prior to expected load reductions rom energyefficiency.

In the 2013 IRP, PaciCorp identied a twenty-year re-source investment schedule, PaciCorps 2013 Pre erredPort olio. Te 2013 Pre erred Port olio consists o cumula-tive supply additions, rm power purchases, and direct-con-trol load management or energy efficiency programs toaddress system resource deciency during the period 2013through 2032. Te Pre erred Port olio includes 7,159megawatts o additional supply. O this total, orty-vepercent is thermal resource (primarily gas-red generation),twenty-ve percent is load management and energy effi-

ciency, seventeen percent is unspecied annual rm powerpurchases, and thirteen percent is renewable resource (windand solar).

According to PaciCorp, reduced loads and avorable mar-ket conditions have led the company torely increasingly oncost-effective energy efficiency and annual rm power pur-chases to meet its resourceneeds in the near term.

Large Electric Power Plant

Environmental UpgradesIn August 2012, PaciCorpled with the Commission a voluntary request or

approval o a resource decision to construct selectivecatalytic reduction SCR emission reduction systemson units three and our o the Jim Bridger coal-redsteam electric plant located in Wyoming. PaciCorpstated the proposed SCR systems are needed to complwith state and ederal regional haze rules which callor reductions in nitrogen oxides emissions. Accord-ing to PaciCorp, the SCR systems must be completeon units three and our by year end 2015 and 2016,respectively, to meet compliance requirements.

Tis was the rst voluntary request or approval o aresource decision led with the Commission pursuantto part our o Utahs Energy Resource Procurement

Act, as ound in Utah Code Annotated 54-17-402.Tis statute authorizes the Commission to hear vol-untary requests to approve all or part o a proposedresource decision by a public utility be ore the utilityimplements the resource decision.

On May 10, 2013, the Commission issued an orderapproving PaciCorps voluntary request. In thisorder, the Commission conditioned its approval oauthorized project costs upon review o PaciCorpsexecuted engineering, procurement, and constructioncontract or the project and upon the nal levels onitrogen oxide emissions required by the EPA.

ransmission Expansion-Certicates o Convenienceand Necessity

In March 2013, the Commission granted PaciCorpsrequest or a Certicate o PublicConvenience and Necessity toconstruct a new 345 kV trans-mission line between its existing

Sigurd substation located in SevieCounty, Utah, and the existingRed Butte substation in Wash-ington County, Utah. Te Com-mission based its decision on anuncontested settlement stipulationled by intervening parties.


14/52


14 | PSC

According to PaciCorp, the project directly addressesits need to meet electric service obligations to cus-tomers by adding additional transmission acilities toits system, improving reliability o the interconnectedtransmission system, and increasing transmissioncapacity needed to serve growing electric demand insouthwest Utah. PaciCorp maintains the proposedline will also address Federal Energy Regulatory Com-mission, Western Electric Coordinating Council, andNorth American Electric Reliability Corporation reli-ability standards and criteria. In addition, the projectwill provide access to renewable and other generationsources as well as increased capacity or energy im-ports and exports into and out o Utah. Te Companyestimates the line will be in service by June 2015.

Electric Service Reliability

During FY 2013, the Commission completed rulemakingactivities pertaining to electric service reliability. Te newrule, Utah Administrative Code R746-313, Electric ServiceReliability, was made effective in September 2012. Te pur-pose o the new rule is to establish requirements or eachelectric corporation and distribution electrical cooperativethat is also a public utility to have a program to ensure reli-able electric service is provided to each electric service cus-tomer in accordance with Utah Code Annotated 54-3-1.

Te new rule requires each electric corporation and distri-bution electrical cooperative that is also a public utility tohave a written electric service reliability program approvedby its governing authority. Te rule also requires these enti-ties to provide annual reports on electric service reliabilityand major event reports to the Commission and/or theboard o directors o the distribution electrical cooperative.Te rule identies the standards (Te Institute o Electricaland Electronics Engineers (IEEE), Inc., Standard IEEE 1366 2003 Guide or Electric Power Distribution ReliabilityIndices and/or the United States Department o Agriculture

Rural Utilities Service RUS Bulletin 1730A-119 InterruptionReporting and Service Continuity Objectives or ElectricDistribution Systems) or which electric service reliabilityindices are to be calculated and provides requirements oraddressing inquiries about electric service reliability.

Finally, the rule requires that within three months aferthe effective date o the rules, an electric company whosegoverning authority is the Commission must le or theCommissions approval o reliability per ormance baselines or System Average Interruption Duration Index(SAIDI) and System Average Interruption FrequencyIndex (SAIFI) reliability indices.

Following the requirements o the new rule, in early Jan-uary 2013, PaciCorp led its proposed SAIDI and SAIFIper ormance baselines or Commission approval. In May2013, the Commission issued an order approving a SAIDIper ormance baseline o 201 minutes and a SAIFI per or-mance baseline o 1.9 events or PaciCorp and claried thrule reporting requirements.

Large Electric Power Plant Procurement Te Commission is authorized to regulate the procurementand approval o the acquisition o PaciCorps signi-cant energy resources, large electric generating plants o100 megawatts or greater. In September 2012, PaciCorpin ormed the Commission there was no longer a need topursue a generation resource in the 2016 time period dueto reductions in orecasted loads. PaciCorp there oreproposed terminating its request or proposal solicitationprocess or a generation resource previously planned orthe 2016 time period. PaciCorp based this decision upon

an updated assessment o its needs, preliminary evaluationo bids, and third party evaluations and recommendations.On February 21, 2013, the Commission issued a Report anOrder determining PaciCorp adequately supported its de-cision to terminate its solicitation process or an All-SourceResource or the 2016 ime Period.


15/52


15 | PSC

ECHNICAL CONFERENCESTe Commission sponsored the ollowing technical con erences during scal year 2013:

August 3, 2012, Docket No. 11-035-104, echnical Con erence to discuss a cost effectiveness study prepared by theCadmus Group on PaciCorps proposed Solar Incentive Program.

October 25, 2012, Docket No. 11-035-73, echnical Con erence or PaciCorp to answer questions and explain tointerested parties the acts and reasons behind the termination o the solicitation process or the All-Source Resourceor the 2016 time period.

October 25, 2012, Docket No. 12-035-97, echnical Con erence to discuss PaciCorps proposal to construct a new 3kV transmission line between its existing Sigurd substation located in Sevier County, Utah, and the existing Red Butsubstation in Washington County, Utah.

November 6, 2012, Docket No. 12-035- 10, echnical Con erence or the Utah Division o Public Utilities to discussits response to a Commission inquiry concerning resource acquisition timing pursuant to the Electric Service ScheduNo. 37 method or avoided cost calculations.

November 28, 2012, Docket No. 11-035-73, echnical Con erence to address discovery responses prepared by Paci-Corp regarding the termination o the solicitation process or the All-Source Resource or the 2016 time period.

February 20, 2013, Docket No. 13-035-02, echnical Con erence to discuss PaciCorps proposal to change its depreation rates.

April 4, 2013, Docket No. 13-035-01, echnical Con erence or PaciCorp to review, clari y, and discuss the in orma-tion and details supporting its proposed service quality per ormance baseline measures.

June 11, 2013, Docket No. 13-035- 08, echnical Con erence to allow the Company an opportunity to present its pro-posed changes to Electric Service Regulation No. 3, Electric Service Agreements, which provides proposed languagto hold de aulting customers responsible or attorney ees and costs when those customers accounts go unpaid. Teechnical Con erence also offered parties an opportunity or questions and answers.

ELEC RIC DOCKE SGeneral Cases

03-035-14 / 12-035-101In the Matter of the Application of Paci- Corp for Approval of an IRP-based Avoid- ed Cost Methodology for QF ProjectsLarger than One Megawatt/In the Matterof the Application of Rocky MountainPower for Approval of Changes to ariffSchedule No. 38, Qualifying Facility Proce- dures:

In a March 21, 2013, Order on ariffModications, the Commission approvedPaciCorps proposed modications toElectric Service Schedule No. 38.

Te modications were led to complywith the Commissions October 31, 2005,Report and Order in Docket No. 03-035-14. In the application, PaciCorp proposedadditional language stating Quali yingFacilities ("QFs") which are 100 megawattsor greater in size and seeking a contractterm o ten years or more must participatein PaciCorps competitive bidding pro-

cess. Te new language included a websitelink to in ormation regarding PaciCorpscompetitive bidding processes as well as awebsite check list allowing QF developersto view the process or determiningindicative pricing.

On June 10, 2013, the Commission issuedan Order on ariff Modicationsapproving PaciCorps revised UtahSchedule No. 38, Sheet No. 38.7, led pursuant to the Commissions March 21, 2013Order on ariff Modications.

Key: Docket NumberShort itle Status as o June 30, 2013


16/52


16 | PSC

09-035-15In the Matter of the Applica- tion of Rocky Mountain Powerfor Approval of its ProposedEnergy Cost AdjustmentMechanism:

In an August 30, 2012, Order,the Commission modied therate setting process in the Ener-gy Balancing Account ("EBA")Pilot Program. Among otherthings, the Commissions Or-der established milestones orprocessing uture EBA applica-tions beginning in 2013.On October 16, 2012, theCommission issued an Orderon Request or Rehearing. Inthis Order, the Commissionclaried its August 30, 2012,Order in this docket.

09-035-20In the Matter of the Applica- tion of US Magnesium LLC,for Determination of Ratesand Conditions for Inter- ruptible Service from andQF Sales to Rocky MountainPower:

In a November 26, 2012, Re-port and Order, the Commis-sion approved an amendmentto an existing Electric ServiceAgreement (ESA) betweenRocky Mountain Power andUS Magnesium, LLC (USMag), originally approved bythe Commission on December23, 2009. Te Office o Con-sumer Services argued US Magshould pay its share o EBAcosts as part o the contractamendment, consistent withthe Commissions Order inDocket No. 11-035- 10. TeCommission determined theEBA issue will be addressed inDocket No. 12-035-67.

09-035-36In the Matter of the Applica- tion of Rocky Mountain Powerfor Approval of a StrategicCommunications and Out- reach Program for DemandSide Management:

Te Commission issued anOrder on December 19, 2012,acknowledging PaciCorpsTird Annual Report on theStrategic Communications andOutreach Program as meetingthe general requirements andguidelines o the CommissionsJune 11, 2009, Order in thisDocket.

10-035-97In the Matter of the Consoli- dated Applications of RockyMountain Power for Approvalof Standard Reciprocal andNon-Reciprocal Pole Attach- ment Agreements:

In a November 21, 2012,Report and Order, the Com-mission approved a settlementstipulation and authorizedchanges to Electric ServiceSchedule No. 4, including theSa e Harbor pole attachmentagreement previously ap-proved in Docket No. 04-999-03.

11-035-73 / 11-2035-01In the Matter of the Appli- cation of PaciCorp, by andthrough its Rocky MountainPower Division, for Approvalof a Solicitation Process for anAll-Source Resource for the2016 ime Period (RFP)/Inthe Matter of PaciCorps 2011Integrated Resource Plan:

On February 21, 2013, theCommission determined Paci -iCorp adequately supportedits decision to terminate its

solicitation process or an All-Source Resource or the 2016ime Period. Te Commissionalso determined no urtheradjudicative proceedings wereto be anticipated or the RFP or

IRP dockets addressed in thisReport and Order.

11-035-104In the Matter of the Inves- tigation into Extending andExpanding the Solar IncentiveProgram and Possible Develop- ment of an Ongoing Program:

On October 1, 2012, the Com-mission issued a Report andOrder approving a new Solar

Incentive Program which provides nancial support to thosecustomers who purchase andinstall solar photovoltaic

11-035-200 / 12-035-79 /12-035-80In the Matter of the Applica- tion of Rocky Mountain Powerfor Authority to Increase itsRetail Electric Utility ServiceRates in Utah and for Ap- proval of its Proposed ElectricService Schedules and ElectricService Regulations/In theMatter of the Application ofRocky Mountain Power for anAccounting Order to Defer theCosts Related to the Decom- missioning of the CarbonPlant/In the Matter of the Ap- plication of Rocky MountainPower for a Deferred Account- ing Order Regarding CostsIncurred for Naughton Unit 3

Selective Catalytic ReductionSystem, Pulse Jet Fabric FilterSystem and Related Environ- mental Upgrades:

In a September 19, 2012,Report and Order, the Com-mission approved a multi-year,uncontested settlement

stipulation addressing compo-nents in this docket (re erredto in ormally as the 2012PaciCorp General Rate Case)including revenue requirementrevenue spread to classes ocustomers, rate design, andcertain de erred accountingtreatment. Te Commissionsaction also resolved Paci CorpAccounting Order applicationsin Docket No. 12-035-79 andDocket No. 12-035-80 to de erCarbon Power Plant decom-missioning costs and Naugh-ton Unit 3 Selective CatalyticReduction System, Pulse JetFabric Filter System develop-ment costs.

12-028-01In the Matter of the Appli- cation of Garkane EnergyCooperative, Inc. to Amend itsCerticated Service Area:

In a December 11, 2012, OrdeAmending Service Area, theCommission approved theapplication o Garkane EnergyCooperative, Inc. to amendits certicated service area,

effective January 15, 2013, inthe absence o a timely protestor request or hearing.

12-035-67In the Matter of the Applica- tion of Rocky Mountain Powerto Increase Rates by $29.3 Mil- lion or 1.7 Percent Trough theEnergy Balancing Account:

In an August 30, 2012, Order,the Commission modiedthe rate setting process in theEnergy Balancing Account(EBA) Pilot Program. Amonother things, the CommissionsOrder established milestonesor processing uture EBA ap-plications beginning in 2013.


17/52


17 | PSC

On October 16, 2012, theCommission issued an Orderon Request or Rehearing. Inthis Order, the Commissionclaried its August 30, 2012,Order in this docket

In a February 27, 2013 Reportand Order, the Commissionapproved an uncontestedsettlement stipulation andincreased rates by $7.8 millionto recover the October throughDecember 2011 EBA de erredbalance rom customers. Teincrease will be recovered romcustomers over a two-yearperiod, in the amount o $3.9million per year. Te Commis-sion allocated approximatelythirty-nine percent o therevenue increase to residentialcustomers and sixty-one per-cent o the revenue increase tocommercial and industrial cus-tomers. Te Commission alsoapproved a separate, uncontest-ed stipulation resolving issuesassociated with the applicationo the EBA to a special contractcustomer.

12-035-68In the Matter of the Applica- tion of Rocky Mountain Powerfor Authority to Revise Rates inariff Schedule 98, RenewableEnergy Credits Balancing Ac- count, by Crediting Revenuesof Approximately $4.0 Million:

On November 9, 2012, theCommission issued an OrderEstablishing Final Rates. Inthis order, the Commissionapproved the audit report othe Utah Division o PublicUtilities and designated as nala $4.0 million revenue creditpreviously approved on aninterim basis.

12-035-86In the Matter of the FormalComplaint of Caithness Con- dominium HOA against RockyMountain Power:

Te Commissions October31, 2012, Order dismissedthe Caithness CondominiumHOA complaint against RockyMountain Power.

12-035-90In the Matter of the PowerPurchase Agreement betweenCottonwood Hydro, LLC andPaciCorp, dated December14, 2011:

In an October 1, 2012, Orderon Request or Agency Action,the Commission denied therequest o Cottonwood Hydro,LLC or agency action thatwould unilaterally change theterms o power purchase agree-ments executed with Paci-Corp. Te Commissions actiondenied Cottonwood Hydrosrequest that the agreements beamended to allow Cottonwoodadditional time to per orm

certain obligations speciedwithin the agreements.

12-035-92In the Matter of the VoluntaryRequest of Rocky MountainPower for Approval of Re- source Decision to ConstructSelective Catalytic ReductionSystems on Jim Bridger Units3 and 4:

In a May 10, 2013, CondentialReport and Order Pursuant toUAC 746-100-16, the Commis-sion approved PaciCorps vol-untary request or approval o aresource decision to constructselective catalytic reductionsystems on Jim Bridger Units3 and 4.

In a May 30, 2013 Order oClarication, the Commissionmodied Ordering Paragraphstwo and three o its May 10Order. Te Commission alsomodied the May 10 Ordersuch that the discussion inthat Order pertaining to nalengineering, procurement, andconstruction contract costswas consistent with the May 30Order o Clarication.

On June 26, 2013, the Commis-sion issued an Order DenyingRequest or Review or Rehear-ing which denied WesternResource Advocates request orreview or rehearing

12-035-94 / 12-035-95 /12-035-96In the Matter of a New ElectricService Agreement betweenRocky Mountain Power andKennecott Utah Copper, LLC/ In the Matter of the Applica- tion of Rocky Mountain Powerfor Approval of the PowerPurchase Agreement betweenPaciCorp and Kennecott UtahCopper LLC (Smelter)/In theMatter of the Application ofRocky Mountain Power for Ap- proval of the Power PurchaseAgreement between PaciCorpand Kennecott Utah CopperLLC (Renery):

On December 4, 2012, theCommission issued a Reportand Order approving an energyservice agreement and twopurchase power agreementsbetween PaciCorp, doing

business in Utah as RockyMountain Power, and Ken-necott Utah Copper LLC. Teenergy service agreement willbe in effect or two years, romJanuary 1, 2013, through De-cember 31, 2014. Te purchasepower agreements are one yearin duration and will be effectiveor calendar year 2013.

12-035-97In the Matter of the Applica- tion of Rocky Mountain Powerfor a Certicate of PublicConvenience and NecessityAuthorizing Construction ofthe Sigurd Red Butte No. 2345 kV ransmission Line:

In a March 15, 2013, Reportand Order, the Commissionapproved an uncontestedsettlement stipulation andissued a certicate o publicconvenience and necessityauthorizing construction o theSigurd to Red Butte No. 2, 345kV ransmission Line.

12-035-100 In the Matter of the Appli- cation of Rocky MountainPower for Approval of Changesto Renewable Avoided CostMethodology for QualifyingFacilities Projects Larger thanTree Megawatts:

On December 20, 2012, theCommission issued an Orderon Motion to Stay AgencyAction denying Rocky Moun-

tain Powers motion to stay thecurrent market proxy methodor calculating avoided costpricing or large wind quali-ying acilities under ElectricService Schedule No. 38. TeCommission also affirmed itsintention to reexamine the cur-rent method in this docket.



18/52


18 | PSC

12-035-102In the Matter of the VoluntaryRequest of Rocky MountainPower for Approval of Re- source Decision to AcquireNatural Gas Resources:

In an April 19, 2013, Reportand Order, the Commissionapproved an uncontestedsettlement stipulation resolvingRocky Mountain Powers vol-untary request or approval oa resource decision to acquirenatural gas resources.

12-035-103In the Matter of the Appli- cation of Rocky MountainPower for Approval of a PowerPurchase Agreement betweenPaciCorp and esoro Reningand Marketing Company:

On December 4, 2012, theCommission issued an OrderApproving Power PurchaseAgreement approving a one-year power purchase agree-ment between PaciCorp, do-ing business in Utah as RockyMountain Power and esoroRening and Marketing Com-pany. Te agreement will be ineffect or twelve months, romJanuary 1, 2013, to December31, 2013.

12-035-114In the Matter of the Applica- tion of Rocky Mountain Powerfor Approval of the Pole At- tachment Agreement betweenRocky Mountain Power andZayo Group, LLC:

On January 9, 2013, theCommission issued an OrderApproving Pole AttachmentAgreement, Subject to Filingo Revised Electric ServiceSchedule No. 4.

Afer reviewing PaciCorpsapplication and attachmentsas well as the Utah Division oPublic Utilitys recommenda-tions, the Commission oundapproval o the applicationand the agreement to be justand reasonable, and in thepublic interest. Te Commis-sion there ore approved theapplication and the Agreement,subject to the rental rates andees in the Agreement beingconsistent with Electric ServiceSchedule No. 4.

12-035-116In the Matter of the DSMAnnual Report Filing by RockyMountain Power:

In a January 15, 2013 Order,the Commission approvedPaciCorps Motion to perma-nently extend the annual lingdate o PaciCorps Utah DSMAnnual Report rom March 31to May 1.

12-035-117In the Matter of Rocky Moun- tain Powers Annual ReportCost-Effectiveness estingRequirements:On January 15, 2013, theCommission issued an Orderapproving PaciCorps propos-al to modi y DSM benet-costanalysis guidelines previouslyapproved by the Commissionin its October 7, 2009, Order inDocket No. 09-035-27. In thisOrder, the Commission direct-ed PaciCorp to per orm thecost effectiveness tests based on

PaciCorpsexpectedavoidedcosts whena DSMprogram isinitiallyapproved.

Te Company requested thisrequirement be modied suchthat PaciCorp is requiredto per orm cost effectivenesstests using initial avoided costassumptions only or new pro-grams through the rst year oimplementation or or existingprograms that incur signi-cant changes within a givenprogram year.

12-035-119In the Matter of the Applica- tion of Rocky Mountain Powerfor Approval of its CustomerService Agreement with theCity of Enterprise, Utah:

In a January 29, 2013, OrderApproving Customer ServiceAgreement, the Commissionapproved a Customer ServiceAgreement by and betweenRocky Mountain Power, theCity o Enterprise, Utah, and alocal resident.

12-2557-01In the Matter of Blue MountainPower Partners, LLCs Requestthat the Public Service Com-

mission of Utah Require Pacif- iCorp to Provide the ApprovedPrice for Wind Power for theBlue Mountain Project:

On September 20, 2012, theCommission issued an Orderon Request or Agency Actiondirecting PaciCorp to provideBlue Mountain indicativeavoided cost pricing or theBlue Mountain Project basedon the Schedule 38 market

price proxymethod.

13-028-01In the Matter of the GarkaneEnergy Cooperative, IncsConstruction of a 30 Mile 138kV ransmission Line fromropic, Utah to Hatch, Utah:

On February 6, 2013, the Commission issued an Order a -rming Utah Code Annotated 54-4-25(2)(c) applies to thethirty-mile transmission linerom ropic, Utah to Hatch,Utah, as that line is describedby Garkane Energy in its Janu-ary 4, 2013, letter led with thCommission.

13-035-01In the Matter of Rocky Moun- tain Powers Proposed UtahService Reliability PerformanceBaselines:

On May 30, 2013, the Com-mission issued an Order onPer ormance Baselines regard-ing PaciCorps Proposed UtahService Reliability Per ormancmeasurement process. In thisOrder, the Commission: (1)approved a SAIDI per ormance

baseline o 201 minutes, (2)approved a SAIFI per ormancebaseline o 1.9 events, (3) ap-proved PaciCorps proposedmethod or the determinationand use o a rozen custom-er count, (4) approved, withthe exception o PaciCorpsproposed notication require-ments, other denitions, data,and methods presented in theApplication, and (5) directedthat PaciCorp shall report tothe Commission each time areliability per ormance baselinis exceeded in accordance withR756-313-7(1), unless other-wise approved.


19/52


19 | PSC


13-035-13In the Matter of the Applica- tion of Rocky Mountain Powerfor Approval of a PromotionalProgram Pursuant to R746- 404:

In an Order issued February28, 2013, the Commissionapproved PaciCorps applica-tion to conduct a promotionalprogram consisting o a videocontest in connection withPaciCorps Wattsmart DSMCommunications and Out-reach campaign pursuant toUAC R746-404.

13-035-19In the Matter of the Applica- tion of Rocky Mountain Powerfor Approval of its CustomerService Agreement with SpringCity, Utah:

Te Commission issued anOrder Approving CustomerService Agreement with SpringCity, Utah on June 18, 2013.

13-035-20In the Matter of the Applica-

tion of Rocky Mountain Powerfor Authority to Cancel ElectricService Schedule No. 96AIrrigation Load Control ariff;Approve a New Demand SideManagement Contract andApprove a Schedule No. 105Irrigation Demand Response:In a March 15, 2013 Order, theCommission approved:

(1) PaciCorps request tocancel Electric Service Sched-ule No. 96A, the DispatchableIrrigation Load Control CreditRider Program, effective March15, 2013, (2) PaciCorps DSMcontract with a third partyaggregator or delivery o theirrigation load control pro-gram,

and (3) PaciCorps proposalto implement Electric ServiceSchedule No. 105, Irriga-tion Load Control Program,effective March 15, 2013. TeCommission also directedPaciCorp to annually provideirrigation load control programdata regarding loads availableor curtailment, actual curtail-ment achieved, and capacityand energy reduction pay-ments in its Utah DSM annualreport.

13-035-22In the Matter of the FormalComplaint of (Complainant)for Energy of Utah againstRocky Mountain Power:

Based on Energy o Utahswithdrawal o its ormalcomplaint, and or other goodcause appearing, on April 30,2013, the Commission issuedan Order dismissing Energy oUtahs ormal complaint andcancelled a hearing scheduledor uesday, April 30, 2013.

13-035-33

In the Matter of the Applica- tion of Rocky Mountain Powerfor Authority to Revise Ratesin ariff Schedule 98, Renew- able Energy Credits BalancingAccount:

In a May 29, 2013, Report andOrder, the Commission ap-proved an interim rate changeby crediting the Electric Ser- vice Schedule No. 98 balancingaccount revenue o $3,263,532,effective June 1, 2013. Terate change is subject to theCommissions right to order are und or surcharge ollowingcompletion o the Utah Divi-sion o Public Utilities audit.

13-035-58In the Matter of the Applica- tion of Rocky Mountain Powerfor Approval of its Asset rans- fer Agreement with the City ofBlanding, Utah:

On June 12, 2013, the Commis-sion issued an Order Approv-ing Asset rans er Agreement.Te Agreement provides orthe trans er o thirty-ve Paci -iCorp customers along with therelated distribution acilities tothe City o Blanding.

13-035-78In the Matter of the Applica- tion of Rocky Mountain Powerfor Approval of its CustomerService Agreement with SpringCity, Utah:

Te Commission issued anOrder Approving CustomerService Agreement with SpringCity, Utah on June 18, 2013.

13-035-89In the Matter of the Applica- tion of Rocky Mountain Powerfor Authority to Cancel Electric

Service Schedules No. 115, 125,126, and 192; Approve Sched- ule No. 140:

In a June 28, 2013 Order, theCommission canceled Elec-tric Service Schedule No. 115- Commercial and IndustrialEnergy Efficiency IncentivesOptional or Quali yingCustomers, Electric ServiceSchedule No. 125 - Commer-cial and Industrial EnergyServices Optional or Quali y-ing Customers, Electric ServiceSchedule No. 126 - UtahCommercial and IndustrialRe-Commissioning Program,and Electric Service ScheduleNo. 192 - Sel -Direction Credit.

Te Commission consoli-dated these programs into anew schedule, Electric ServiceSchedule No. 140 - Non-Resi-dential Energy Efficiency andapproved modications to thetariff language in tariff sheets140.2, 140.3, and 140.18, ascontained in an Errata Filingprovided by PaciCorp with aneffective date o July 1, 2013.

ELEC RICariff Changes

11-035- 10In the Matter of Rocky Moun- tain Powers Proposed Schedule94, Energy Balancing AccountPilot Program ariff:

In an August 30, 2012, Order,the Commission modied therate setting process in the Energy Balancing Account (EBAPilot Program. Among otherthings, the Commissions Or-der established milestones orprocessing uture EBA applications beginning in 2013.

On October 16, 2012, theCommission issued an Orderon Request or Rehearing. Inthis Order, the Commissionclaried its August 30, 2012,Order in this docket.

12-028- 02In the Matter of Garkane Ener- gy Cooperative, Inc.s Revisionsto Rate Schedules No. 33 andNo. 34:

On October 3, 2012, the Com-mission issued a ariff Ac-knowledgment Letter acknowledging the proposed revisions.


20/52


20 | PSC

12-031- 04In the Matter of Mt. WheelerPower Inc.s Revisions to Rule 1Denitions and Rule 6 Dis- continuance, Restoration, IdleService and Refusal of Service:

On October 3, 2012, the Com-mission issued a ariff Ac-knowledgment Letter acknowl-edging the proposed revisions.

12-031- 05In the Matter of Mt. WheelerPower Inc.s Revisions to RateCode R, H-2, H-1 (I), GS,GS-CH, NM, LGS AE, LGS-C,LGS-CH, LGS-OP, OLS, SL,I-KWH, I-OP, I, and H-I:

On October 24, 2012, theCommission issued a ariff Ac-knowledgment Letter acknowl-edging the proposed revisions.

12-031- 06In the Matter of Mt. WheelerPower Inc.s Revisions to Rule 1Denitions:

On November 19, 2012, theCommission issued a ariff

Acknowledgment Letter ac-knowledging the proposedrevisions.

12-035- 10In the Matter of Rocky Moun- tain Powers Proposed RateChanges to Electric ServiceSchedule No. 37, Avoided CostPurchases from QualifyingFacilities:

On November 28, 2012, the

Commission issued a Clari-cation and Procedural Orderdirecting PaciCorp to releits proposed Schedule 37 ratesconsistent with the type andtiming o the next de errableresource included in Paci-Corps most recently led IRPaction plan.

In this Order, the Commissionalso directed PaciCorp to leannual Schedule 37 proposedrates within thirty days o theled date o its IRP or IRPupdate.

In a March 7, 2013, Order, theCommission did not approvePaciCorps proposed Schedule37 rates led December 18,2012.

13-035- 01In the Matter of Rocky Moun- tain Powers Schedule 194Demand-side ManagementCost Adjustment Credit:

On February 27, 2013, theCommission issued an Orderapproving PaciCorps pro-posed adjustment to the

Electric Service Schedule No.194 Demand Side Manage-ment Cost Adjustment Creditrate. Tis adjustment, effectiveMarch 1, 2013, resulted in a$13 million customer re und.

13-035- 03In the Matter of Rocky Moun- tain Powers Proposed Changesto Regulation No. 7 Meteringand Schedule No. 300 Regu- lation Charges to Allow forNon-Standard Meters:

On March 21, 2013, theCommission issued an Orderapproving proposed changes

to Electric Service RegulationNo. 7, Metering, effective April1, 2013. Te Commission alsoapproved changes to ElectricService Schedule No. 300,Regulation Charges, with theOffice o Consumer Servicesrecommendations o adding arestocking ee, effective April 1,2013. Te Commission direct-ed PaciCorp to le updatedtariff sheets reecting thisdecision by April 15, 2013. TeOrder also directed PaciCorpto le a report on the use ometer accommodation optionsin conjunction with the nextgeneral rate case.

13-035- 08In the Matter of Rocky Moun- tain Powers Proposed Changesto Electric Service RegulationNo. 3 to Indicate Customersare Responsible for ReasonableCourt Costs, Attorneys Feesand/or Collection Agency FeesIncurred in the Collection ofUnpaid Debt Following theDue Date of Teir Closing Bill:

On May 3, 2013, the Commis-sion issued an Order Sus-pending Proposed Changes toElectric Service Regulation N3 pending urther proceedingsand a nal order o the Com-mission.

Key: Docket NumberShort itle

Status as o June 30, 2013


21/52


22/52

N A T U R A L

G A S


23/52


23 | PSC

N G U O

Questar Gas Company (Questar Gas) is the only natural gas utility regulated by the Utah Public Service Commission or rate making purposes. Questar Gas currently provides natural gas distribution services to over900,000 customers in Utah and, unlike other natural gas utilities, owns natural gas production resources whichprovide about sixty percent o the gas supply or its rm service customers. Questar Gas also provides other naural gas associated services such as the transportation o customer-acquired gas through its distribution systemand the sale o compressed natural gas or use in natural gas vehicles (NGV).

Rate Changes

Under Utah Code Ann. 54-4-4, the Commission isresponsible or determining just and reasonable rates orQuestar Gas. Te Commission approves rate adjustmentsduring general rate case proceedings when the costs associ-ated with the distribution o natural gas are evaluated. Te

Commission also approves rate changes or non-distribu-tion-related costs associated with the acquisition o naturalgas and related gathering, storage, and transportation costs.

In late December 2012, Questar Gas led with the Com-mission a notice o intent to le a general rate case on orafer March 1, 2013.

At least twice annually Questar Gas les a pass-throughapplication to adjust its rates in order to recover the costso producing its own gas and purchasing gas rom others(collectively re erred to in rates as the gas commodity rateelement), and the costs associated with gas gathering, stor-age, and interstate transportation (collectively re erred to inrates as the supplier non-gas, or SNG, rate element). Mostrecently, in June 2013, Questar Gas pass-through ling re-ected commodity and SNG costs o $611 million, or an in-crease o $61 million over the previous pass-through lingapproved by the Commission effective September 1, 2012.Tis amount represents approximately sixty-ve percento the cost o providing natural gas service to customers inUtah. Te application was approved by the Commissioneffective July 1, 2013. When actual costs vary rom thoseprojected, the difference is maintained in a special balanc-ing account and an appropriate rate adjustment is made in apass-through rate proceeding.

Since 2006, the Commission has approved the use oseveral other balancing accounts agreed to in settle-ment stipulations, each supported by a diverse groupo parties. Tese balancing accounts track costs andrevenues associated with the Conservation Enabling

ariff (CE ) which allows Questar Gas to collect axed revenue per customer on a monthly basis inexchange or promoting customer energy efficiencyprograms, demand side management (DSM) pro-grams, and a low income assistance program. Rateadjustments associated with these accounts are nor-

mally led concurrent with pass-through proceed-ings. Most recently, in conjunction with Questar Gass2009 general rate case, the Commission approved anIn rastructure racker Pilot Program which providesQuestar Gas the ability to collect the costs associatedwith replacing aging pipeline in rastructure betweengeneral rate cases. Te CE and DSM balancingaccounts are only applicable to Questar Gas GeneralService (GS) rate schedule whereas the other balanc-ing accounts and the In rastructure racker apply toall sales and transportation, as well as the natural gas vehicle rate schedules.

During scal year 2013, the Commission approved severalchanges to Questar Gas rates. Te ollowing in ormationpresents the approved revenue change and in parentheses,the associated percent change in a typical residential cus-tomers annual bill. A typical residential customer is deneas one using eighty-two decatherms per year o natural gasOn September 1, 2012, a $13.4 million (1.80 percent) ratedecrease reecting the ollowing elements was implement-ed: (1) a $5.72 million (.69 percent) decrease or the gas

pass-through balancing account, (2) a $.78 million (.10 percent) decrease associated with the Conservation Enablingariff account balance, (3) a $9 million (1.27 percent)decrease associated with the demand side management/energy efficiency balancing account, (4) a $.05 million (.0percent) increase associated with the Low Income Assis-tance Program balancing account, and (5) a $2.1 million(.25 percent) increase associated with the In rastructureracker Pilot Program.


24/52


24 | PSC

Effective December 1, 2012, a $.45 million (.02 percent) de-crease reecting the ollowing elements was implemented:(1) a $5.15 million (.70 percent) increase associated with theIn rastructure racker Pilot Program, and (2) a $5.6 mil-lion (.72 percent) decrease associated with the demand sidemanagement/energy efficiency balancing account.

Finally, on June 1, 2013, a $61.4 million (7.08 percent)increase or the gas pass-through balancing account wasauthorized reecting a projected increase in gas commoditycosts offset by a slight decrease in SNG costs.

Wexpro II Agreement

For over thirty years, under the terms o the WexproStipulation and Agreement (Wexpro I Agreement) ap-proved by the Commission in 1981, Wexpro Gas (Wexpro)has managed and developed natural gas reserves withina dened set o properties or the benet o Questar Gasretail customers. Production rom these reserves is deliv-ered to Questar Gas at cost o service, which historically hasaveraged to be lower-priced than market-based resources.Tis arrangement has provided Questar Gas customers witha stable source o gas supply and long-term hedge againstprice volatility. With the implementation o new drillingand production methods, Wexpro has been able to developand produce these dened properties ar longer than partiesto the Wexpro I Agreement originally anticipated.

In September 2012, Questar Gas led an application re-questing Commission approval o the Wexpro II Agreemententered into between Questar Gas, Wexpro Gas (Wexpro),the Utah Division o Public Utilities (Division), and the Wy-oming Office o Consumer Advocate (OCA). Among otherthings, the Wexpro II Agreement set orth the proceduresor Questar Gas to apply to the Commission or approval toinclude oil and gas properties under the Wexpro II proper-ties. Upon approval, Wexpro II properties would be man-aged and developed in a manner similar to the propertiesincluded under the Wexpro I Agreement.

In March 2013, the Commission approved the Wexpro IIAgreement as being in the public interest. Questar Gas didnot le any requests or approval o properties under theWexpro II Agreement in FY 2013.

Resource Planning

Te Commission requires Questar Gas to prepare and lean annual integrated resource plan (IRP) which is usedby Questar Gas as a guide or meeting the natural gasrequirements o its customers on both a day-to-day andlong-term basis. Te standards and guidelines on which theIRP is based are intended to ensure the present and uturecustomers o Questar Gas are provided natural gas energyservices at the lowest costs consistent with sa e and reli-able service, the scal requirements o a nancially healthyutility, and the long-run public interest. Te IRP is based ona twenty-year planning horizon, ocusing on the immediateuture. In August 2012, the Commission provided guidanceto Questar Gas on its 2012 Integrated Resource Plan anduture plans. In May 2013, Questar Gas led its 2013 IRPrepresenting the plan year o June 1, 2013 through May 31,2014.

As part o the IRP process, Questar Gas evaluates dataon natural gas supply and demand, energy efficiency andconservation, system constraints and capabilities, and gasdrilling, gathering, transportation and storage, as well asresults rom a cost-minimizing stochastic model, to developa resource acquisition plan and strategy. In the 2013 IRPQuestar Gas identied a cost o service gas production leveo eighty million decatherms and a balanced port olio othirty-ve million decatherms o purchased gas to meet thegas supply requirements o its customers. Questar Gas also

identied several potential uture system upgrade and re-placement projects to ensure sa e, adequate service. QuestaGas concluded it should continue to monitor and manageproducer imbalances and promote cost-effective energy efficiency measures. In addition, Questar Gas concluded thereis no current need or any additional price stabilizationmeasures or purchased gas contracts to mitigate the risk o volatility in the marketplace. Questar Gas will review this sue on an annual basis to determine whether such measureare appropriate in the uture.

In order to prevent catastrophic pipeline ailure incidents,the U.S. Department o ransportation Hazardous Materialsand Sa ety Administration (PHMSA) promulgated rules toensure the integrity o natural gas transmission and distri-bution lines. Te 2013 IRP addresses Questar Gas plannedintegrity management program activities and associatedcosts and indicates Questar Gas estimates it will spend ovesix million per year through 2015 on transmission and dis-tribution integrity management activities.


25/52


25 | PSC

In conjunction with Questar Gas 2013IRP process, pre-ling meetings wereheld addressing the per ormance othe high pressure and intermediatehigh pressure distribution systems andan update on the eeder line replace-

ment program, Questar Gas integritymanagement program and costs, acomparison o transportation alter-natives, contract updates, the statuso the litigation pertaining to QuestarGas system-wide gathering agreementwith QEP Field Service Company, costo service gas drilling and productionactivities, gas modeling issues, andQuestar Gas efforts related to cybersecurity. A schedule or evaluation oQuestar Gas IRP was set in mid-June2013 inviting parties to le commentsin August and September.

Natural Gas Conservation andEnergy Efficiency

Te Commission reviews and approves Questar Gas annualplan and budget or demand side management (DSM)activities. Tis plan is based on the efforts o Questar Gas,with input rom a Commission-established DSM AdvisoryGroup to design, implement, evaluate, and revise cost-e -ective programs to encourage residential and commercialcustomers to conserve energy through education and theuse o energy-efficient products, appliances, and construc-tion methods.

Te programs currently offered by Questar Gas are: Ter-mWise Appliance Rebates Program, TermWise BuilderRebates Program, TermWise Business Rebates Program,TermWise Weatherization Rebates Program, TermWiseHome Energy Audits Program, Low Income WeatherizationAssistance Program, TermWise Business Custom RebatesProgram, and a comprehensive market trans ormationinitiative. Tese programs offer rebates, und training andgrants, and provide in ormation to Questar Gas customerswith the goal o decreasing energy consumption.

In December 2012, the Commis-sion approved Questar Gas esti-mated $22.6 million budget or its2013 demand side managementprograms and market trans orma-tion initiative, a twenty percentdecrease rom the 2012 approvedbudget. Questar Gas indicatesthe decrease is due in large partto Questar Gas success ul effortsin lowering administrative costs.In comparison, Questar Gas 2012budget or demand side manage-ment programs was $28.3 million.Due to changes and renementsmade to the 2012 programs, Que-star Gas expects approximately65,964 customers will participatein the programs, which is approxi-mately thirty percent less than theestimated 2012 levels o participa-tion numbers (91,787 participants)According to Questar Gas, the

estimated participation level is reective o the 2012 actu-al participation levels which were below projections dueto several actors, including reductions in unding romcomplementary programs (e.g., the American Recoveryand Reinvestment Act, Federal tax credits and Utah Statetax credits), reduced messaging rom multiple government

agencies, and continued price reductions or natural gasservice. Questar Gas estimates its 2013 DSM programswill reduce natural gas consumption annually by 589,607decatherms which is equivalent to the annual natural gasconsumption o approximately 7,400 homes based on anannual average usage o eighty decatherms.

In December 2012, the Commission also approved a temporary waiver o Questar Gas licensing requirements to be-come an authorized weatherization installation contractoror six state weatherization implementation agencies.

As required, during FY 2013, Questar Gas led severalreports and assessments pertaining to the status o its DSMactivities. Tis in ormation indicates Questar Gas DSMprogram continues to be cost effective.


26/52


26 | PSC

In rastructure racker

In June 2010, as part o an overall general rate case settle-ment agreement among parties, the Commission approvedQuestar Gas implementation o an In rastructure rackerPilot Program which allows Questar Gas to track and re-cover costs that are directly associated with replacement oaging in rastructure between general rate cases. Tese costsare recovered through a surcharge included in Questar Gaspublished rate schedules or rm and interruptible sales andtransportation customers as well as natural gas vehicles. Teannual in rastructure replacement budget cannot exceed$55 million, adjusted annually or ination.

Since the inception o this pilot program through October2012, Questar Gas reported a net investment o $150 mil-lion or aging in rastructure replacement projects repre-senting an increased revenue requirement o $15.9 million.In December 2012, Questar Gas led its 2013 ReplacementIn rastructure Annual Plan and Budget indicating that in2013, it plans to replace eight major eeder lines in ooele,Salt Lake, Weber, Summit, and Davis Counties, at anestimated cost o $55 million. Questar Gas also anticipatesit will continue to spend $55 million per year rom 2013through 2017 to replace aging in rastructure.

At the Commissions request, in June 2013, the Utah Di- vision o Public Utilities led a report which providedits review and evaluation o the results and impact o the

In rastructure racker Pilot Program. Te program will beevaluated as part o Questar Gas 2013 General Rate Case.

Legislative Changes to itle 54 - Senate Bill 275S

During the 2013 Legislative General Session the UtahLegislature passed Senate Bill 275S Energy Amendments(SB 275) which was signed by Governor Herbert on March28, 2013. SB 275 enacts provisions relating to acilitatingthe conversion to alternative uel vehicles and the provisiono acilities or alternative uel vehicles. SB 275 directs theCommission to initiate and conduct proceedings to exploreoptions and opportunities or advancing and promotingmeasures designed to result in cleaner air in the state andprovides or a cost recovery mechanism or a gas corpora-tion that pays or natural gas ueling stations and relatedacilities.

SB 275 also requires the Commission to report to theGovernor, the Legislative Management Committee, and thePublic Utilities and echnology Interim Committee the re-sults o the Commission proceedings and recommendationor specic actions to implement mechanisms to provideunding or enhancing and expanding the in rastructure

and acilities or alternative uel vehicles.

As required by SB 275, on April 4, 2013, the Commissionopened Docket No. 13-057-02, In the Matter o the Investigation Required by S.B. 275, Energy Amendments, Addresing Cleaner Air through the Enhanced use o AlternativeFuel Vehicles, with the purpose o exploring and develop-ing options and opportunities or advancing and promot-ing measures designed to result in cleaner air in the statethrough the enhanced use o alternative uel vehicles. Withinput rom interested parties, the Commission set a sched-ule or submission o comments and reply comments priorto conducting a hearing scheduled or early August 2013.In this docket, the Commission has requested comment on(1) consideration o the role that gas corporations shouldplay in the enhancement and expansion o the in rastruc-ture and maintenance and other acilities or alternative uel vehicles; (2) the potential unding options available to payor the enhancement and expansion o in rastructure andacilities or alternative uel vehicles; (3) the role local gov-ernment, including any local government entity establishedor the purpose o acilitating conversion to alternative uel

vehicles and o promoting the enhancement and expansion

o the in rastructure and acilities or those vehicles, can orshould play; and (4) the most effective ways to overcomeany obstacles to converting to alternative uel vehicles andto enhancing and expanding the in rastructure and acilitiesor alternative uel vehicles.

Subpoena Pertaining to Questar Gas CompanysSystem-Wide Gathering Agreement

Questar Gas has been involved in litigation pertaining toa disagreement relating to the provisions o the agreement

under which QEP Field Services Company gathers anddelivers gas or Questar Gas. In April 2013, the Commissiowas subpoenaed or in ormation pertaining to this litiga-tion. Te Commission compiled in ormation rom over fydockets and delivered it as required. Questar Gas is providing a quarterly update to the Commission on the status othis legal proceeding.


27/52


27 | PSC

Rule Change Pertaining to Crossed Meter BillingAdjustments

At the request o Questar Gas, the Commission con-ducted a review o Utah Administrative Code R746-320-8 and 9 pertaining to crossed meter billing adjustments. A crossed meter condition arises generallywhen a multi-dwellings uel lines are not identiedcorrectly or meter installation purposes. In these situ-ations, the two ormore customersaffected will eachbe billed basedupon anotherpartys actual gasconsumption.

Prior to the rulechange, which be-came effective onJanuary 7, 2013,once a crossedmeter conditionwas

ECHNICAL CONFERENCESDuring FY 2013, the Commission held technical con erences addressing the ollowing matters:

July 30, 2012, Docket No. 12-999-02, echnical Con erence to review and discuss Questar Gas Companys2011 Utah Results o Operations Report led with the Commission on May 1, 2012.

December 5, 2012, Docket No. 12-057-13, echnical Con erence held during which Questar Gas presentedin ormation in support o its application or approval o the Wexpro II agreement and responded to relatedquestions.

May 2, 2013, Docket No. 12-057-13, echnical Con erence held to urther speci y the materials, analyses,

orecasts, cost estimates, and other data to be contained in all o Questar Gass applications or approval toinclude proposed oil and gas properties under the Wexpro II Agreement.

May 22, 2013, Docket No. 13-057-02, echnical Con erence held during which Senate Bill 275 was discus

June 21, 2013, Docket No. 13-057-04, echnical Con erence held during which Questar Gas presented in omation in support o its 2012 Integrated Resource Plan and responded to related questions.

identied, UAC R746-320-8 and 9, respectively, limited the period covered by a back bill or which chargewere not previously billed or service to six monthsand the period covered by an over bill or which are und is due to twenty- our months. Te revised ruleprovides or twenty- our months o back billing andtwenty- our months o over billing or crossed meterconditions that are not the ault o the company. Tischange ensures that or crossed meters which are not

the ault o thenatural gas utility,the amount theutility recoversrom under billedcustomers is inparity with what is

re unded to overbilled customers.Te change willalso alleviate bill-ing complications.


28/52


28 | PSC

NA URAL GAS DOCKE SGeneral Cases

08-057-11In the Matter of the Investi- gation and the Consolidation

of Dockets of the FormalComplaints against QuestarGas Company Relating toBack-Billing:

An Order Granting Extensiono ime was issued December18, 2012. Te Commissiongranted the Division o PublicUtilities request or an exten-sion o the comment deadlineto February 4, 2013.

A letter rom the Commissionwas issued on April 4, 2013.Te Commission concludedQuestar Gas Companys Meterand ransponder InspectionProgram Final Summary Re-port and the Divisions associ-ated review and audit satisedthe requirements specied inthe Commissions December3, 2008, Order ApprovingSettlement Stipulation withModication in this docket.

09-057-16In the Matter of the Applica- tion of Questar Gas Companyto Increase Distribution Non- Gas Rates and Charges andMake ariff Modications:

An Order on In rastruc-ture racker Pilot ProgramEvaluation Plan was issued onMarch 11, 2013. Te Commis-sion requested the Divisiono Public Utilities to providean evaluation o Questar GasCompanys In rastructureracker Pilot Program sinceits inception through the 2013heating season by June 1, 2013.

An Order Granting Extensionwas issued on May 29, 2013.Te Commission granted theDivision o Public Utilitiesrequest or an extension to le

its report by June 17, 2013.10-057-18In the Matter of the Applica- tion of Questar Gas Companyto Amortize the Demand SideManagement/Energy EfficiencyDeferred Account Balance:

An Order Setting Final Rateswas issued January 24, 2013.Based on the memorandum othe Division o Public Utilitiesproviding the results o its au-dit, the Commission made nalthe rates and charges original-ly set as interim by previousorder.

11-057-04In the Matter of the Applica- tion of Questar Gas Companyto Amortize the Demand SideManagement/Energy EfficiencyDeferred Account Balance:

An Order Setting Final Rateswas issued January 24, 2013.Based on the memorandum othe Division o Public Utilitiesproviding the results o its au-dit, the Commission made nalthe rates and charges original-ly set as interim by previousorder.

11-057-15In the Matter of the Applica- tion of Questar Gas Compa- ny to Amortize the EnergyEfficiency Deferred Account

Balance and for ariff Modi- cation:

An Order Setting Final Rateswas issued January 24, 2013.Based on the memorandum othe Division o Public Utilitiesproviding the results o its au-dit, the Commission made nalthe rates and charges originally set as interim by previousorder.

12-057-01In the Matter of the FormalComplaint of Complainantagainst Questar Gas Company:

An Order Dismissing Com-plaint was issued December21, 2012. Te Commissiondismissed with prejudice thecomplaint o the Complainantagainst Questar Gas Company.


An Order o Dismissal wasissued August 30, 2012. TeCommission granted QuestarGas Companys motion todismiss.

12-057-07In the Matter of Questar GasCompany's Integrated Re- source Plan (IRP) for PlanYear: June 1, 2012 to May 31,

2013: A Report and Order was issuedAugust 6, 2012. Te Commis-sion determined Questar GasCompanys 2012 IntegratedResource Plan satises therequirements o the 2009 Stan-dards and Guidelines.

12-057-08In the Matter of the Pass- Trough Application ofQuestar Gas Company foran Adjustment in Rates andCharges for Natural Gas Ser- vice in Utah:

A Report and Order was issuedSeptember 10, 2012. Te Com-mission approved the uncon-tested application o QuestarGas Company, on an interimbasis, pending the completiono audits by the Division oPublic Utilities.

12-057-09In the Matter of the Applica- tion of Questar Gas Companyto Amortize the ConservationEnabling ariff BalancingAccount:

A Report and Order was issuedSeptember 10, 2012. Te Com-mission approved the uncon-tested application o Questar

Gas Company on an interimbasis, pending the completiono audits by the Division oPublic Utilities.

Key: Docket NumberShort itle

Status as o June 30, 2013


29/52


29 | PSC

12-057-10In the Matter of the Applica- tion of Questar Gas Compa- ny to Amortize the EnergyEfficiency Deferred Account

Balance: A Report and Order was issuedSeptember 10, 2012. Te Com-mission approved the uncon-tested application o QuestarGas Company on an interimbasis, pending the completiono audits by the Division oPublic Utilities.

An Order Setting Final Rateswas issued January 24, 2013.

Based on the memorandum othe Division o Public Utilitiesproviding the results o its au-dit, the Commission made nalthe rates and charges original-ly set as interim by previousorder.

12-057-11In the Matter of the Appli- cation of Questar Gas Com- pany for a ariff Change andAdjustment to the Low IncomeAssistance/Energy AssistanceRate:

A Report and Order was issuedSeptember 10, 2012. Te Com-mission approved the uncon-tested application o QuestarGas Company on an interimbasis, pending the completiono audits by the Division oPublic Utilities.

12-057-12In the Matter of the Applica- tion of Questar Gas Companyto Include the InfrastructureRate Adjustment:

A Report and Order was issuedSeptember 10, 2012. Te Com-mission approved the uncon-tested application o QuestarGas Company on an interimbasis, pending the completiono audits by the Division oPublic Utilities.

12-057-13In the Matter of the Applica- tion of Questar Gas Company

for Approval of the Wexpro IIAgreement:

A Scheduling Order wasissued October 16, 2012. TeCommission established aschedule or addressing thelegal grounds or the Office oConsumer Services oppositionto Questar Gas Companysapplication.

A Scheduling Order and Noticeo echnical Con erence andHearings was issued Novem-ber 9, 2012. Te Commissionestablished the schedule andprocess or reviewing the Wex-pro II Agreement.

An Order Granting Interven-tion was issued November 14,2012. Te Commission grantedintervention in this proceed-ing to the Utah Association oEnergy Users.

An Order Granting Interven-tion was issued December 20,2012. Te Commission grantedintervention in this proceedingto Rocky Mountain Power.

A Notice o Recusal was issuedon January 17, 2013. Commis-sioner Tad LeVar gave noticeo his recusal in this proceed-ing due to his prior involve-

ment in the matter related tohis ormer duties as DeputyDirector o Commerce or theState o Utah.

A Report and Order was issuedMarch 28, 2013. Te Commis-sion approved the applicationo Questar Gas Company orapproval o the Wexpro IIAgreement which establishesterms and conditions or thepotential uture acquisition and

development o certain oil andgas properties.

12-057-14In the Matter of the Applica- tion of Questar Gas Companyfor Approval of the 2013 YearBudget for Energy EfficiencyPrograms and Market rans- formation Initiative:

A Report and Order was issuedJanuary 9, 2013. Te Commis-sion approved Questar GasCompanys proposed 2013 YearBudget or Energy EfficiencyPrograms and Market rans-ormation Initiative with aneffective date o January 1,2013, and granted a temporarywaiver or six governmentalagencies currently not holdingstate-approved contractorslicenses rom the tariffs licens-ing requirement or authorized

weatherization installationcontractors until July 1, 2013.

12-057-15In the Matter of the Applica- tion of Questar Gas Companyto Include the InfrastructureRate Adjustment:

A Report and Order was issuedDecember 13, 2012. Te Com-mission approved the uncon-tested application o QuestarGas Company on an interimbasis, pending the completiono audits by the Division oPublic Utilities.

12-057-16In the Matter of the Applica- tion of Questar Gas Compa-

ny to Amortize the EnergyEfficiency Deferred AccountBalance:

A Report and Order was issuedDecember 13, 2012. Te Com-mission approved the uncon-tested application o QuestarGas Company on an interimbasis, pending the completiono audits by the Division oPublic Utilities.

An Order Setting Final Rateswas issued February 4, 2013.Based on the January 30, 2013memorandum o the Divisiono Public Utilities, providingthe results o its audit, theCommission made nal therates and charges originally setas interim by previous order.


An Order o Dismissal wasissued February 1, 2013. TeCommission granted QuestarGas Companys motion todismiss.


30/52


30 | PSC

An Order Approving ariffModications was issuedFebruary 12, 2013. TeCommission approved

Questar Gas Companysproposed changes to its UtahNatural Gas ariff PSCU 400with the Division o PublicUtilities modication andthe Companys and Divisionsclarications provided athearing, effective January 25,2013.

13-057-01In the Matter of Questar GasCompanys Report on DSMExpenditures and Decath- erm (Dth) Savings to Date:

A Report and Order was is-sued February 28, 2013. TeCommission approved theincreased level o spendingor Questars 2012 Term-Wise Builder Program asreported by Questar andreviewed by the Division oPublic Utilities.

13-057-02In the Matter of the Inves- tigation Required by S.B.275, Energy Amendments,Addressing Cleaner Air

through the Enhanced use ofAlternative Fuel Vehicles:

A Scheduling Order and Noticeo Public Hearing was issuedApril 18, 2013. Te Commis-sion established the scheduleor this proceeding.

A Notice o Pre-hearingCon erence was issued May 22,2013. Te Commission issueda notice o a pre-hearing con-erence to be held on August5, 2013.

13-057-03In the Matter of the Pass- Trough Application ofQuestar Gas Company foran Adjustment in Rates andCharges for Natural Gas Ser- vice in Utah:

A Report and Order was issuedJune 17, 2013. Te Commis-sion approved the uncontestedapplication o Questar GasCompany or an increaseo $61.4 million in its Utahnatural gas rates on an interimbasis, pending the completiono an audit by the Division oPublic Utilities.

13-057-04In the Matter of Questar GasCompanys Integrated ResourcePlan (IRP) for Plan Year: June1, 2013 to May 31, 2014:

A Scheduling Order was issueJune 19, 2013. Te Commis-sion established the scheduleor this proceeding.

12-057-18In the Matter of Questar GasCompanys Replacement In- frastructure 2013 Annual Planand Budget:

A letter rom the Co

Documents

2013 Utah Public Service Commission Annual Report