Boise, ID, United States
Boise, ID, United States

Idaho Power Company is a regulated electrical power utility. Its business involves the purchase, sale, generation, transmission and distribution of electricity in eastern Oregon and southern Idaho. It is a subsidiary of IDACORP, Inc. The company's 24,000-square-mile service area generally follows the area around the Snake River and its tributaries.Idaho Power owns and operates 17 hydroelectric dams and 2 natural gas power plants. IPC also owns shares of three coal-fired power plants.In 2007, electricity sold by IPC was 33% hydroelectric, 39% thermal and 28% was purchased from other generation companies. Wikipedia.


Time filter

Source Type

News Article | May 4, 2017
Site: www.prnewswire.com

"Economic activity remains strong in Idaho Power's service area, with new customers coming online and existing large-load customers building new facilities. Employment levels are growing and we continue to receive high levels of interest from companies seeking to expand or site in our service area. "For the full year, we continue to project Idaho Power's use of additional accumulated deferred investment tax credits under the Idaho regulatory settlement to be less than $10 million," added Anderson. IDACORP is reaffirming its full year 2017 earnings guidance in the range of $3.90 to $4.05 per diluted share. A summary of financial highlights for the quarter ended March 31, 2017 is as follows (in thousands except per share amounts): The table below provides a reconciliation of net income attributable to IDACORP for the three months ended March 31, 2017, from the three months ended March 31, 2016 (items are in millions and are before related tax impact unless otherwise noted). IDACORP's net income increased $7.4 million for the first quarter of 2017 compared with the first quarter of 2016. The increase was driven primarily by a $6.9 million increase in Idaho Power's net income. At Idaho Power, an increase in sales volumes on a per-customer basis contributed $9.1 million to operating income in the first quarter of 2017 compared with the first quarter of 2016, but was largely offset by a $6.1 million decrease in revenues from the application of the FCA mechanism. Temperatures in Idaho Power's service area were colder than normal in the first quarter of 2017 and were significantly colder than first quarter 2016 temperatures. The cold weather resulted in increased residential sales volumes on a per-customer basis and caused an increase in the proportion of residential sales in higher rate categories under Idaho Power's tiered rate structure. These higher tiered rates drove a $1.5 million increase to operating income. Customer growth further drove higher sales volumes, lifting operating income by $2.7 million, as the number of Idaho Power customers grew by 1.9 percent over the prior twelve months. In addition to these changes in general business revenues, Idaho Power benefited from a $2.8 million increase in third-party use of electric property, wheeling, and other revenue due to a new long-term wheeling agreement as well as an increase in Idaho Power's Open Access Transmission Tariff rates, which was effective in October 2016. Partly offsetting these increases, other operating and maintenance expenses were $2.2 million higher, compared with the same period in the prior year. Weather affected the timing and amount of certain operating and maintenance expenses during the quarter. The increase in income tax expense was principally the result of higher income before income taxes, partially offset by an increase in additional ADITC amortization. Based on Idaho Power's current expectations of full-year 2017 results, Idaho Power recorded $1.9 million of additional ADITC amortization under its Idaho regulatory settlement stipulation during the first quarter of 2017 compared with $0.5 million in the first quarter of 2016. Idaho Power currently expects to use less than $10 million of additional ADITC for the full-year 2017. 2017 Annual Earnings Guidance and Key Operating and Financial Metrics IDACORP is reaffirming its earnings guidance estimate for 2017. The 2017 guidance incorporates all of the key operating and financial assumptions listed in the table that follows (in millions, except per share amounts): More detailed financial information is provided in IDACORP's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed today with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and posted to the IDACORP Web site at www.idacorpinc.com. IDACORP will hold an analyst conference call today at 2:30 p.m. Mountain Time (4:30 p.m. Eastern Time). All parties interested in listening may do so through a live webcast on the company's website (www.idacorpinc.com), or by calling (800) 242-0681 for listen-only mode. There is no passcode required; simply request to be connected to the "IDACORP, Inc." call. The conference call logistics are also posted on the company's website and will be included in the company's earnings news release. Slides will be included during the conference call. To access the slide deck, register for the event just prior to the call at www.idacorpinc.com/investor-relations/earnings-center/conference-calls. A replay of the conference call will be available on the company's website for a period of 12 months and will be available shortly after the call. IDACORP, Inc. (NYSE: IDA), Boise, Idaho-based and formed in 1998, is a holding company comprised of Idaho Power, a regulated electric utility; IDACORP Financial, a holder of affordable housing projects and other real estate investments; and Ida-West Energy, an operator of small hydroelectric generation projects that satisfy the requirements of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978. Idaho Power began operations in 1916 and employs approximately 2,000 people to serve a 24,000-square-mile service area in southern Idaho and eastern Oregon. With 17 low-cost hydroelectric projects as the core of its generation portfolio, Idaho Power's more than 535,000 residential, business and agricultural customers pay some of the nation's lowest prices for electricity. To learn more about IDACORP or Idaho Power, visit www.idacorpinc.com or www.idahopower.com. In addition to the historical information contained in this press release, this press release contains (and oral communications made by IDACORP, Inc. and Idaho Power Company may contain) statements, including, without limitation, earnings guidance, that relate to future events and expectations and, as such, constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Any statements that express, or involve discussions as to, expectations, beliefs, plans, objectives, outlook, assumptions, or future events or performance, often, but not always, through the use of words or phrases such as "anticipates," "believes," "continues," "estimates," "expects," "guidance," "intends," "potential," "plans," "predicts," "projects," "targets," or similar expressions, are not statements of historical facts and may be forward-looking. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve estimates, assumptions, risks, and uncertainties. Actual results, performance, or outcomes may differ materially from the results discussed in the statements. In addition to any assumptions and other factors and matters referred to specifically in connection with such forward-looking statements, factors that could cause actual results or outcomes to differ materially from those contained in forward-looking statements include the following: (a) the effect of decisions by the Idaho and Oregon public utilities commissions, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and other regulators that impact Idaho Power's ability to recover costs and earn a return; (b) the expense and risks associated with capital expenditures for infrastructure, and the timing and availability of cost recovery for such expenditures; (c) changes in residential, commercial, and industrial growth and demographic patterns within Idaho Power's service area and the loss or change in the business of significant customers, and their associated impacts on loads and load growth, and the availability of regulatory mechanisms that allow for timely cost recovery in the event of those changes; (d) the impacts of economic conditions, including inflation, the potential for changes in customer demand for electricity, revenue from sales of excess power, financial soundness of counterparties and suppliers, and the collection of receivables; (e) unseasonable or severe weather conditions, wildfires, drought, and other natural phenomena and natural disasters, which affect customer demand, hydroelectric generation levels, repair costs, and the availability and cost of fuel for generation plants or purchased power to serve customers; (f) advancement of generation or energy efficiency technologies that reduce loads or reduce Idaho Power's sale of electric power; (g) adoption of, changes in, and costs of compliance with laws, regulations, and policies relating to the environment, natural resources, and threatened and endangered species, and the ability to recover resulting increased costs through rates; (h) variable hydrological conditions and over-appropriation of surface and groundwater in the Snake River Basin, which may impact the amount of power generated by Idaho Power's hydroelectric facilities; (i) the ability to acquire fuel, power, and transmission capacity under reasonable terms, particularly in the event of unanticipated power demands, lack of physical availability, transportation constraints, or a credit downgrade; (j) accidents, fires (either at or caused by Idaho Power's facilities), explosions, and mechanical breakdowns that may occur while operating and maintaining Idaho Power's assets, which can cause unplanned outages, reduce generating output, damage the companies' assets, operations, or reputation, subject the companies to third-party claims for property damage, personal injury, or loss of life, or result in the imposition of civil, criminal, and regulatory fines and penalties; (k) the increased power purchased costs and operational challenges associated with purchasing and integrating intermittent renewable energy sources into Idaho Power's resource portfolio; (l) disruptions or outages of Idaho Power's generation or transmission systems or of any interconnected transmission system may cause Idaho Power to incur repair costs and purchase replacement power at increased costs; (m) the ability to obtain debt and equity financing or refinance existing debt when necessary and on favorable terms, which can be affected by factors such as credit ratings, volatility in the financial markets, interest rate fluctuations, decisions by the Idaho or Oregon public utility commissions, and the companies' past or projected financial performance; (n) reductions in credit ratings, which could adversely impact access to capital markets, increase costs of borrowing, and would require the posting of additional collateral to counterparties pursuant to credit and contractual arrangements; (o) the ability to enter into financial and physical commodity hedges with creditworthy counterparties to manage price and commodity risk, and the failure of any such risk management and hedging strategies to work as intended; (p) changes in actuarial assumptions, changes in interest rates, and the return on plan assets for pension and other post-retirement plans, which can affect future pension and other postretirement plan funding obligations, costs, and liabilities; (q) the ability to continue to pay dividends based on financial performance and in light of contractual covenants and restrictions and regulatory limitations; (r) changes in tax laws or related regulations or new interpretations of applicable laws by federal, state, or local taxing jurisdictions, the availability of tax credits, and the tax rates payable by IDACORP shareholders on common stock dividends; (s) employee workforce factors, including the operational and financial costs of unionization or the attempt to unionize all or part of the companies' workforce, the impact of an aging workforce and retirements, the cost and ability to retain skilled workers, and the ability to adjust the labor cost structure when necessary; (t) failure to comply with state and federal laws, regulations, and orders, including new interpretations and enforcement initiatives by regulatory and oversight bodies, which may result in penalties and fines and increase the cost of compliance, the nature and extent of investigations and audits, and the cost of remediation; (u) the inability to obtain or cost of obtaining and complying with required governmental permits and approvals, licenses, rights-of-way, and siting for transmission and generation projects and hydroelectric facilities; (v) the cost and outcome of litigation, dispute resolution, and regulatory proceedings, and the ability to recover those costs or the costs of operational changes through insurance or rates, or from third parties; (w) the failure of information systems or the failure to secure data, failure to comply with privacy laws, security breaches, or the direct or indirect effect on the companies' business or operations resulting from cyber attacks, terrorist incidents or the threat of terrorist incidents, and acts of war; (x) unusual or unanticipated changes in normal business operations, including unusual maintenance or repairs, or the failure to successfully implement new technology solutions; and (y) adoption of or changes in accounting policies and principles, changes in accounting estimates, and new U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission or New York Stock Exchange requirements, or new interpretations of existing requirements. Any forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date on which such statement is made.  New factors emerge from time to time and it is not possible for management to predict all such factors, nor can it assess the impact of any such factor on the business or the extent to which any factor, or combination of factors, may cause results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statement.  Readers should also review the risks and uncertainties listed in IDACORP, Inc.'s and Idaho Power Company's most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K and other reports the companies file with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, including (but not limited to) Part I, Item 1A - "Risk Factors" in the Form 10-K and Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations and the risks described therein from time to time.  IDACORP and Idaho Power disclaim any obligation to update publicly any forward-looking information, whether in response to new information, future events, or otherwise, except as required by applicable law. To view the original version on PR Newswire, visit:http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/idacorp-inc-announces-first-quarter-results-reaffirms-2017-earnings-guidance-300451283.html


Geist D.R.,Pacific Northwest National Laboratory | Deng Z.,Pacific Northwest National Laboratory | Mueller R.P.,Pacific Northwest National Laboratory | Brink S.R.,Idaho Power Company | Chandler J.A.,Idaho Power Company
Transactions of the American Fisheries Society | Year: 2010

The incipient lethal temperature (ILT) and critical thermal maximum (CTM) methods are used to set temperature limits for fish. However, the standard application of these methods does not always match the temperature regimes that fish experience in the wild. We used alternative methods to determine the thermal tolerance thresholds of juvenile fall-run Chinook salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha exposed to the temperature regimes that are common in the entrapment pools that form along the shoreline of the Snake River when flows are altered to meet electric power demand. A modified CTM test with a steady temperature rise (1.5°C/h) showed that one-half the fish died when temperatures reached 27.4-27.9°C and that survival at 25°C was highly variable; the average time to the first death was 9.1 h, varying from 1.7 to 22.5 h. Over 30 d, 99.8% of the fish in the constant temperature regimes (14-22°C) survived. In the fluctuating temperature regimes (which varied from 10-14°C to 22-27.5°C), overall survival was 97.3%; however, only 83.0% and 88.9% survived in the groups that reached daily maximums of 27°C and 27.5°C, respectively. Growth over 30 d in the constant thermal regimes was nearly twice as high as that in the fluctuating regimes, even when daily average temperatures were similar. The maximum growth was 1.9%/d in terms of fork length [FL] and 11.2%/d in terms of weight (WT) at a constant 20°C. The lowest growth occurred in the two groups exposed to daily temperatures of 27°C or more, namely, 0.7-0.8% (FL) and 2.7-3.4% (WT). The results of this study suggest that thermal tolerance tests that expose juvenile fall Chinook salmon to thermal regimes that match the field conditions in entrapment pools along the shoreline of the Snake River provide higher temperature criteria than the standard ILT and CTM methods. © American Fisheries Society 2009.


Conner J.T.,Idaho Power Company | Tonina D.,University of Idaho
Earth Surface Processes and Landforms | Year: 2014

Two-dimensional (2D) hydrodynamic models have been increasingly used to quantify aquatic habitat and stream processes, such as sediment transport, streambed morphological evolution, and inundation extents. Because river topography has a strong influence on predicted hydraulic conditions, 2D models require accurate and detailed bathymetric data of the stream channel and surrounding floodplains. Besides collection of mass points to construct high-resolution three-dimensional surfaces, bathymetries may be interpolated from cross-sections. However, limited information is available on the effects of cross-section spacing and the derived interpolated bathymetry on 2D model results in large river systems. Here, we investigated the effects of cross-section spacing on flow properties simulated with 2D modeling at low, medium and high discharges in two morphologically different reaches, a simple (almost featureless with low sinuosity) and a complex (presenting pools, riffles, runs, contractions and expansions) reach of the Snake River (Idaho, USA), the tenth largest river in the United States in terms of drainage area. We compared the results from 2D models developed with complete channel bathymetry acquired with multibeam sonar data and photogrammetry, with 2D model results that were developed using interpolated topography from uniformly distributed transects. Results indicate that cross-sections spaced equal to or greater than 2 times the average channel width (W*) smooths the bathymetry and suppresses flow structures. Conversely, models generated with cross-sections spaced at 0.5 and 1 W* have stream flow properties, sediment mobility and spatial habitat distribution similar to those of the complete bathymetry. Furthermore, differences in flow properties between interpolated and complete topography models generally increase with discharge and with channel complexity. © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.


Papic M.,Idaho Power Company | Ciniglio O.,Idaho Power Company
IEEE Power and Energy Society General Meeting | Year: 2013

This paper addresses the development of a risk-based contingency analysis for planning and operating a transmission system. The primary focus of the paper is on assessing power system performance following the consecutive loss of two bulk transmission elements (n-1-1 contingency analysis). The developed approach can be extended to perform the risk-based analysis of other types of contingencies (n-1, n-2, and n-k) used in planning and operation; this approach can use various types of system adjustments as mitigation measures depending on the types and values of post-contingency limit violations. In this paper, we assume generation rescheduling and/or load curtailment are available for mitigation, and these adjustments are given the highest priority. The suggested approach is a further enhancement of the present deterministic approach used by Idaho Power in performing North Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) compliance studies. Contingency probability, an essential element for risk calculation, was estimated from historical outage data captured and archived by the Idaho Power Generation and Transmission Outage Reporting System (GATOR). © 2013 IEEE.


Xue L.,U.S. National Center for Atmospheric Research | Hashimoto A.,Meteorological Research Institute | Murakami M.,Meteorological Research Institute | Rasmussen R.,U.S. National Center for Atmospheric Research | And 5 more authors.
Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology | Year: 2013

A silver iodide (AgI) cloud-seeding parameterization has been implemented into the Thompson microphysics scheme of the Weather Research and Forecasting model to investigate glaciogenic cloudseeding effects. The sensitivity of the parameterization to meteorological conditions, cloud properties, and seeding rates was examined by simulating two-dimensional idealized moist flow over a bell-shaped mountain. The results verified that this parameterization can reasonably simulate the physical processes of cloud seeding with the limitations of the constant cloud droplet concentration assumed in the scheme and the two-dimensional model setup. The results showed the following: 1) Deposition was the dominant nucleation mode of AgI from simulated aircraft seeding, whereas immersion freezing was the most active mode for ground-based seeding. Deposition and condensation freezing were also important for groundbased seeding. Contact freezing was the weakest nucleation mode for both ground-based and airborne seeding. 2) Diffusion and riming on AgI-nucleated ice crystals depleted vapor and liquid water, resulting in more ice-phase precipitation on the ground for all of the seeding cases relative to the control cases.Most of the enhancement came from vapor depletion. The relative enhancement by seeding ranged from 0.3% to 429% under various conditions. 3) The maximum local AgI activation ratio was 60% under optimum conditions. Under most seeding conditions, however, this ratio was between 0.02% and 2% in orographic clouds. 4) The seeding effect was inversely related to the natural precipitation efficiency but was positively related to seeding rates. 5) Ground-based seeding enhanced precipitation on the lee side of the mountain, whereas airborne seeding from lower flight tracks enhanced precipitation on the windward side of the mountain. © 2013 American Meteorological Society.


Xue L.,U.S. National Center for Atmospheric Research | Tessendorf S.A.,U.S. National Center for Atmospheric Research | Nelson N.,U.S. National Center for Atmospheric Research | Rasmussen R.,U.S. National Center for Atmospheric Research | And 4 more authors.
Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology | Year: 2013

Four cloud-seeding cases over southern Idaho during the 2010/11 winter season have been simulated by the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model using the coupled silver iodide (AgI) cloud-seeding scheme that was described in Part I. The seeding effects of both ground-based and airborne seeding as well as the impacts of model physics, seeding rates, location, timing, and cloud properties on seeding effects have been investigated. The results were compared with those from Part I and showed the following: 1) For the four cases tested in this study, control simulations driven by the Real-Time Four Dimensional Data Assimilation (RTFDDA) WRF forecast data generated more realistic atmospheric conditions and precipitation patterns than those driven by the North America Regional Reanalysis data. Sensitivity experiments therefore used the RTFDDA data. 2) Glaciogenic cloud seeding increased orographic precipitation by less than 1% over the simulation domain, including the Snake River basin, and by up to 5%over the target areas. The local values of the relative precipitation enhancement by seeding were ;20%. Most of the enhancement came from vapor depletion. 3) The seeding effect was inversely related to the natural precipitation efficiency but was positively related to seeding rates. 4) Airborne seeding is generally more efficient than ground-based seeding in terms of targeting, but its efficiency depends on local meteorological conditions. 5) The normalized seeding effects ranged from 0.4 to 1.6 under various conditions for a certain seeding event. © 2013 American Meteorological Society.


McKinney E.,Idaho Power Company | Daniel Arjona J.,Idaho Power Company
IEEE Power and Energy Society General Meeting | Year: 2014

A process for identifying specific opportunities for a utility's implementation of microgrids is presented in the form of a process performed at an investor-owned electrical power utility in the Intermountain West. The paper provides the conditions, criteria, and constraints by which the study was conducted, it identifies specific scenarios and locations within the service territory by way of general conditions of viability, it addresses other possible scenarios and locations that are unique to the Company, and it provides a cost comparison example. © 2014 IEEE.


Papic M.,Idaho Power Company | Ciniglio O.,Idaho Power Company
IEEE Power and Energy Society General Meeting | Year: 2014

Modern power systems are designed to withstand n-1 and credible n-2 outages. The ability of a system to survive major disturbances was not comprehensively addressed by system planers. Most large blackouts happening throughout the world involve a sequence of cascading outages that are complex and require adequate methodologies and tools to be addressed properly. Cascading outages expose transmission planners and operation engineers to new challenges, including identifying means to minimize the cascading vulnerability impacts. This paper presents a comprehensive, practical approach to identify and analyze the multiple contingencies that lead to cascading outages in Idaho Power's network. The primary focus of this paper is to identify the system's most vulnerable places and double outages that lead to widespread power disruptions and cascading, evaluate their consequences, and identify possible remedial actions to prevent cascading or mitigate its effect. The suggested approach is a further enhancement of the present study approach used by Idaho Power in performing North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) compliance studies. Understanding the effects of cascading on vulnerabilities of Idaho Power's system is needed to determine when a disruption of service is likely to occur and to take appropriate steps to reduce the associated risk. Understanding cascading outages and being able to predict the associated risks is becoming an integral part of planning and operation studies by Idaho Power. In this paper, a model of the actual Idaho portion of the Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC) system was used. The results of the cascading analysis for five base cases are presented. © 2014 IEEE.


BOISE, Idaho, Feb. 23, 2017 /PRNewswire/ -- IDACORP, Inc. (NYSE: IDA) recorded fourth quarter 2016 net income attributable to IDACORP of $33.2 million, or $0.66 per diluted share, compared with $31.8 million, or $0.63 per diluted share, in the fourth quarter of 2015. IDACORP reported 2016...


News Article | March 8, 2016
Site: www.reuters.com

Coal is loaded into a truck at the Jim Bridger Mine, owned by energy firm PacifiCorp and the Idaho Power Company, outside Point of the Rocks, Wyoming March 14, 2014. Coal companies are responsible for spent mines and they typically use cash, bonds or other financing to cover future cleanup costs. But some of the largest producers use self bonds, which are not backed by concrete collateral, to insure such costs. Regulators worry those costs could fall to taxpayers if the companies fail.The coal industry has roughly $3.6 billion in future cleanup costs covered by self bonds and the Government Accountability Office should review the program, the lawmakers wrote. U.S. Senators Maria Cantwell of Washington and Dick Durbin of Illinois are seeking an "audit of self-bonding" in the coal industry and a review of how the oil, gas and mineral sectors protect taxpayers from cleanup costs. The Government Accountability Office is an independent, non-partisan investigative arm of Congress. Interior Department Secretary Sally Jewell told Congress last month that self-bonding was "a very significant problem and a risk to the taxpayer" in light of coal industry woes and bankruptcies for Arch Coal and Alpha Natural Resources. The coal industry has been hurt by oversupply, competition from natural gas and weak export demand. Arch and Alpha have sought to jettison cleanup liabilities in bankruptcy court and Jewell said officials would not tolerate such maneuvers. While federal officials conceived self-bonding decades ago, coal-producing states are largely left to administer a program that some still defend. Last week, Illinois told the Interior Department it would allow Peabody Energy Corp to continue to self bond about $100 million in future cleanup costs. If Illinois and other coal-producing states were to revoke Peabody's self bonds, the cash-strapped company might need private financing to underwrite about $1.38 billion in liabilities not now backed by collateral. Peabody reported about a $2 billion loss last year and has struggled to sell some western mines to raise cash.

Loading Idaho Power Company collaborators
Loading Idaho Power Company collaborators