IDA
#Okay.
Well, it's good to hear from you.
Thanks, <UNK>.
Again, that's something that's still a work in progress.
We would kind of take a look at a number of different options that might be in place, whether it's 2017 with known immeasurables or a forecasted test year ---+ those are all things that we would continue to look at.
<UNK>, I was just going to point out ---+ you know, we talk a lot about this in the sense of ---+ really our major jurisdiction, but we do have ---+ we have two, and it's possible that they would be filed at different times.
At least it's not impossible.
And it's possible that they may have different methodologies when it comes to something like this because Oregon typically [likes to forecast test year].
And that plays into it, too.
So it's hard to just give a definitive single answer.
Well, what our actual earnings were this last year was at ---+ just under 9.5% for Idaho Power, looking at both jurisdictions.
For Idaho, you'd have to say we got at least to 9.5% because we didn't use any tax credits, so it was probably a little stronger than the whatever else was there.
But certainly neither ---+ we've had some better years when we were up around 10%.
We certainly weren't there this year.
Our allowed rate ---+ I don't recall what the Oregon exact number is ---+
Nine-nine in Oregon, and the [unstated] in Idaho was kind of roughly 10.
You have to solve back to it, but that's what was used in ---+ so I would say that for us to achieve numbers that are near those ---+ if you look back over our long history, being within 50 basis points of that isn't bad.
And that's what we have to assess is the items that we would be taking into a case versus what you think you would get in terms of settlement.
You know, that is ---+ the devil's in the details, and that's what is impossible to determine today.
And it all would depend on how they've structured the various items that have been thrown on the table.
You could end up with a lower tax rate and have every single one of those still be there.
It depends on the approach that they take.
And I would say if they take an approach as they have in the past where any accelerated deductions are more like additional depreciation and it's just an accelerated timing, that doesn't affect those deductions at all.
If it's some entirely new approach, you could see a change.
And I guess for us, the final answer is, whatever tax you pay is really what goes into the regulatory model.
So it would depend on whether we're ultimately paying less or more than we are today whether it changes things very much.
This is <UNK>.
We have an active succession-planning process.
And so we continue to look at the future.
And so over the last couple years, we've had a fair number of retirements at the senior level.
And so what we've really been doing right now is continuing to look at that.
We don't have any pending retirements coming up, but you never can project those.
But we just have people ---+ we've kind of moved some people into different spots as we look to the future, the next three, four years down the road sort of thing.
So that's kind of why we made some of the changes.
And a couple of those changes were really to reflect what people were already doing.
Probably the biggest change was when we promoted Adam Richins to his new role and then had Vern Porter kind of change some of his responsibilities.
Those were probably the biggest changes when you look at that.
And it's really related to continuing to plan for the future and making sure we continue to have seamless transitions.
We've had seven officers retire in the last three-plus years, and so we think we've done it fairly seamlessly.
And so we just continue to work hard at that side of things.
So there's nothing other than just the sort of normal course of business things.
And there's nothing imminent that's coming up on any other changes that we're looking at today.
Actually, I'm looking for some stability for a while, actually.
It's kind of a nice thing, you know, with no necessarily pending retirements coming up.
We had a couple last year, but right now we don't have any ---+ with what I know today, nothing pending.
Thank you.
I'm trying to remember which ones I gave you.
The actual return for the year was based on looking at our GAAP ---+ at our year-end earnings.
If you just take Idaho Power, we earned, like 9.47%.
But we do have ---+ in the Idaho jurisdiction, the regulatory stipulation that we're working under supports Idaho jurisdictional earnings up to a 9.5%.
And it looks to year-end equity.
It's not a pure regulatory computation, so it does look at whatever your year-end GAAP equity is.
It's a great question because what will happen is the rates will get set traditionally.
They will be looking at rate base.
They'll be looking at your costs that you're flowing through, the capital you've got invested.
And they will come up with a very typical regulated return that you will develop a rate from.
Then if that decision happens prior to the end of 2019, whatever time there is between then and the end of 2019 reverts back to this settlement mechanism.
And it would look to year-end equity and apply whatever the adjusted return might be to that year-end equity number.
Now post-2019, that would all be up in the air.
You would either revert back to what we've always had historically or would be looking at whether there's any way to negotiate an extension if there's credits left.
Well, I want to thank you all for participating on our call this afternoon and for your continued interest in IDACORP and Idaho Power.
And we hope you all have a great rest of your day.
Thanks for participating.
