Court Opinion

ID: 9547437
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 17:47:20.721899+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:17:44.538972
License: Public Domain

ON REHEARING
HUNTLEY, Justice.
In our Opinion of January 11, 1984, we held that the Idaho Public Utilities Commission has jurisdiction to order Idaho Power to enter into a fixed term, fixed rate contract to purchase energy from Afton. On Petition for Rehearing, Idaho Power has asked the Court to determine the appropriate standard of review to be utilized by the Commission and this Court in cases where, as here, the utility does not voluntarily contract with a CSPP but is compelled to contract by the Commission or the mandates of PURPA.
This Court has held that tariff rates are subject to the fair, just and reasonable standard of review and contract rates are subject to the public interest review standard.1 Idaho Power insists that the fair, just and reasonable standard and not the public interest standard should apply in cases where the utility’s contract with a CSPP is involuntary.
An agreement such as the one entered into between Afton Energy and Idaho Power, while not constituting a tariff, is a special type of contract. The Commission should apply the fair, just and reasonable standard, in a manner not inconsistent with federal law to the extent that it may be applicable, to determine whether the rates need to be adjusted in this particular type of contract. In making this determination, the Commission must consider the effect of the contract rate on the utility, its stockholders and customers and the benefits to the utility power supply system which may be realized through the development of co-generation facilities. We emphasize, however, that whether the rate paid by the utility is fair, just and reasonable is not dependent upon the profit or loss realized by the co-generator at any given time. Our opinion today modifies our prior opinion issued January 11, 1984.
No costs or attorney fees awarded.
DONALDSON, C.J., BAKES and BISTLINE, JJ., concur.

. Grindstone Butte Mutual Canal Company v. Idaho Public Utilities Commission, 102 Idaho 175, 627 P.2d 804 (1981); Idaho Power Co. v. Idaho Pub. U. Comm’n, 99 Idaho 374, 582 P.2d 720 (1978); I.C. §§ 61-301, 61-315, 61-503; Agricultural Products Corp. v. Utah Power & Light Co., 98 Idaho 23, 557 P.2d 617 (1976).