CONTINGENCIES:	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2012
Loss Contingency [Abstract]
Contingencies	CONTINGENCIES IDACORP and Idaho Power have in the past and expect in the future to become involved in various claims, controversies, disputes, and other contingent matters, including the items described in this Note 9. Some of these claims, controversies, disputes, and other contingent matters involve litigation and regulatory or other contested proceedings. IDACORP and Idaho Power intend to vigorously protect and defend their interests and pursue their rights. However, the ultimate resolution and outcome of litigation and regulatory proceedings is inherently difficult to determine, particularly where (a) the remedies or penalties sought are indeterminate, (b) the proceedings are in the early stages or the substantive issues have not been well developed, or (c) the matters involve complex or novel legal theories or a large number of parties. In accordance with applicable accounting guidance, IDACORP and Idaho Power, as applicable, establish an accrual for legal proceedings when those matters proceed to a stage where they present loss contingencies that are both probable and reasonably estimable. In such cases, there may be a possible exposure to loss in excess of any amounts accrued. IDACORP and Idaho Power monitor those matters for developments that could affect the likelihood of a loss and the accrued amount, if any, thereof, and adjust the amount as appropriate. If the loss contingency at issue is not both probable and reasonably estimable, IDACORP and Idaho Power do not establish an accrual and the matter will continue to be monitored for any developments that would make the loss contingency both probable and reasonably estimable. As of the date of this report, IDACORP's and Idaho Power's accruals for legal proceedings are not material to their financial statements as a whole; however, future accruals could be material in a given period. IDACORP's and Idaho Power's determination is based on currently available information, and estimates presented in financial statements and other financial disclosures involve significant judgment and may be subject to significant uncertainty. As available information changes, the matters for which IDACORP and Idaho Power are able to estimate the loss may change, and the estimates themselves may change. For certain of those matters described in this report for which IDACORP or Idaho Power have determined a loss contingency may, in the future, be at least reasonably possible, IDACORP and Idaho Power have stated that they are unable to estimate the possible loss or a range of possible loss that may result from those matters. Depending on a range of factors, such as the complexity of the facts, the unique nature of the legal theories, the pace of discovery, the timing of decisions of the court or arbiter, and the adverse party's willingness to negotiate towards a resolution, it may be months or years after the filing of a case or commencement of a proceeding before IDACORP or Idaho Power may be in a position to estimate the possible loss or range of possible loss for those matters. For matters that affect Idaho Power’s operations, Idaho Power intends to seek, to the extent permissible and appropriate, recovery of incurred costs through the ratemaking process. Pacific Northwest Refund Proceedings On July 25, 2001, the FERC issued an order establishing a proceeding to determine whether there may have been unjust and unreasonable charges for spot market sales in the Pacific Northwest during the period December 25, 2000 through June 20, 2001, because the spot market in the Pacific Northwest was affected by the dysfunction in the California market. During that period, Idaho Power or IE both sold and purchased electricity in the Pacific Northwest. In 2003, the FERC terminated the proceeding and declined to order refunds, but in 2007 the Ninth Circuit issued an opinion, in Port of Seattle, Washington v. FERC, remanding to the FERC the orders that declined to require refunds. The Ninth Circuit's opinion instructed the FERC to consider whether evidence of market manipulation would have altered the agency's conclusions about refunds and directed the FERC to include sales originating in the Pacific Northwest to the California Department of Water Resources (CDWR) in the scope of the proceeding. The Ninth Circuit officially returned the case to the FERC on April 16, 2009. On October 3, 2011, the FERC issued its order on remand. The FERC ordered that the record be re-opened to permit parties seeking refunds to submit seller-specific evidence in support of their claims for sales made during the period confined to December 25, 2000 through June 20, 2001. The seller-specific claims must show that a seller engaged in unlawful market activity with a causal connection to have directly affected the negotiation of the specific contract or contracts to which the seller was a party. IE and Idaho Power understand the order to provide that neither claims of general dysfunction in the California markets nor in the Pacific Northwest market will be sufficient to support claims. While directing a trial-type hearing, the FERC also directed that the hearings be held in abeyance so that the matter may be presented to a settlement judge. On November 2, 2011, each of the City of Seattle, Washington, the City of Tacoma, Washington, the Port of Seattle, and the California Parties (consisting of the California Attorney General and the California Public Utilities Commission) filed requests for rehearing, seeking to expand the scope of the October 3, 2011 order. The designated settlement judge has met with the parties and convened a settlement conference to establish settlement procedures. The FERC's Chief Administrative Law Judge memorialized certain settlement procedures to which the parties agreed in an order issued on November 23, 2011. IE and Idaho Power had reached a settlement with the California Parties in 2006 that disposed of their claims in the Pacific Northwest refund proceeding, as well as in California refund cases. Neither IE nor Idaho Power had sold power to the Port of Seattle during the relevant time period. In the first quarter of 2012 Idaho Power reached a tentative settlement that would have disposed of all claims, other than those of the City of Seattle, had it been accepted by the FERC. On June 13, 2012, the FERC approved the settlement as it applied to the City of Tacoma and disapproved it in part, requiring certain modifications to the settlement that left unclear which other buyers of power were excluded from the settlement. On July 12, 2012, IE and Idaho Power filed a request for clarification and rehearing of the FERC's order. IE and Idaho Power have the right to withdraw from the settlement if they find the FERC's rehearing order to be unacceptable. On July 16, 2012, the FERC's Chief Judge issued an order requiring hearings in the refund proceedings to commence by April 2013. IE and Idaho Power intend to continue to defend their positions in the Pacific Northwest refund proceedings vigorously. The FERC's October 3, 2011 order setting the matter for hearing and the June 13, 2012 order regarding the IE and Idaho Power settlement are subject to rehearing, clarification, and reconsideration. Idaho Power and IE are unable to predict when and how the FERC will act on the rehearing requests, which contracts (if any) would be subject to refunds, whether the FERC will order refunds, or how the refunds would be calculated. As a result of these factors, as of the date of this report Idaho Power and IE are unable to estimate the reasonably possible loss or range of losses that Idaho Power or IE could incur as a result of unsettled claims in this matter. While Idaho Power is unable to quantify or determine the outcome of claims made by parties that have not yet settled, the amount agreed upon in the settlement described above was immaterial to IDACORP's and Idaho Power's financial statements. Water Rights - Snake River Basin Adjudication Idaho Power holds water rights, acquired under applicable state law, for its hydroelectric projects. In addition, Idaho Power holds water rights for domestic, irrigation, commercial, and other necessary purposes related to project lands and other holdings within the states of Idaho and Oregon. Idaho Power's water rights for power generation are, to varying degrees, subordinated to future upstream appropriations for irrigation and other authorized consumptive uses. Over time, increased irrigation development and other consumptive uses within the Snake River watershed led to a reduction in flows of the Snake River. In the late 1970s and early 1980s these reduced flows resulted in a conflict between the exercise of Idaho Power's water rights at certain hydroelectric projects on the Snake River and upstream consumptive diversions. The Swan Falls Agreement, signed by Idaho Power and the State of Idaho on October 25, 1984, resolved the conflict and provided a level of protection for Idaho Power's hydropower water rights at specified projects on the Snake River through the establishment of minimum stream flows and an administrative process governing future development of water rights that may affect those minimum stream flows. In 1987, Congress enacted legislation directing the FERC to issue an order approving the Swan Falls settlement together with a finding that the agreement was neither inconsistent with the terms and conditions of Idaho Power's project licenses nor the Federal Power Act. The FERC entered an order implementing the legislation in March 1988. The Swan Falls Agreement provided that the resolution and recognition of Idaho Power's water rights together with the State Water Plan provided a sound comprehensive plan for management of the Snake River watershed. The Swan Falls Agreement also recognized, however, that in order to effectively manage the waters of the Snake River basin, a general adjudication to determine the nature, extent, and priority of the rights of all water uses in the basin was necessary. Consistent with that recognition, in 1987 the State of Idaho initiated the Snake River Basin Adjudication (SRBA), and pursuant to the commencement order issued by the SRBA court that same year, all claimants to water rights within the basin were required to file water rights claims in the SRBA. Idaho Power has filed claims to its water rights and has been actively participating in the SRBA since its commencement. Questions concerning the effect of the Swan Falls Agreement on Idaho Power's water rights claims, including the nature and extent of the subordination of Idaho Power's rights to upstream uses, resulted in the filing of litigation in the SRBA in 2007 between Idaho Power and the State of Idaho. This litigation was resolved by the Framework Reaffirming the Swan Falls Settlement (Framework) signed by Idaho Power and the State of Idaho on March 25, 2009. In that Framework, the parties acknowledged that the effective management of Idaho's water resources remains critical to the public interest of the State of Idaho by sustaining economic growth, maintaining reasonable electric rates, protecting and preserving existing water rights, and protecting water quality and environmental values. The Framework further provided that the State of Idaho and Idaho Power would cooperate in exploring approaches to resolve issues of mutual concern relating to the management of Idaho's water resources. Idaho Power continues to work with the State of Idaho and other interested parties on these issues. One such issue involves the management of the Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer (ESPA), a large underground aquifer in southeastern Idaho that is hydrologically connected to the Snake River. House Concurrent Resolution No. 28, adopted by the Idaho Legislature in 2007, directed the Idaho Water Resource Board to pursue the development of a comprehensive management plan for the ESPA, to include measures that would enhance aquifer levels, springs, and river flows on the eastern Snake River plain to the benefit of both agricultural development and hydropower generation. In May of 2007, the Idaho Water Resource Board appointed an advisory committee, charged with the responsibility of developing a management plan for the ESPA. Idaho Power was a member of that committee. In January 2009, the Idaho Water Resource Board, based on the committee's recommendations, adopted a Comprehensive Aquifer Management Plan (CAMP) for the ESPA. The Idaho Legislature approved the CAMP that same year. Idaho Power is a member of the CAMP Implementation Committee and continues to work with the Idaho Water Resource Board, other stakeholders, and the Idaho Legislature in exploring opportunities for implementation of the CAMP management plan. Idaho Power also continues its active participation in the SRBA in seeking to ensure that its water rights are protected and that the operation of its hydroelectric projects is not adversely impacted. While Idaho Power cannot predict the outcome, Idaho Power does not anticipate any material modification of its water rights as a result of the SRBA process. Other Proceedings IDACORP and Idaho Power are parties to legal claims and legal and regulatory actions and proceedings in the ordinary course of business that are in addition to those discussed above. However, as of the date of this report the companies believe that resolution of those matters will not have a material adverse effect on their consolidated financial statements. However, Idaho Power is also actively monitoring various environmental regulations that may have a significant impact on its future operations. Given uncertainties regarding the outcome, timing, and compliance plans for these environmental matters, Idaho Power is unable to determine the financial impact of these regulations but does believe that future capital investment for infrastructure and modifications to its electric generating facilities to comply with these regulations could be significant.

CONTINGENCIES

IDACORP and Idaho Power have in the past and expect in the future to become involved in various claims, controversies, disputes, and other contingent matters, including the items described in this Note 9. Some of these claims, controversies, disputes, and other contingent matters involve litigation and regulatory or other contested proceedings. IDACORP and Idaho Power intend to vigorously protect and defend their interests and pursue their rights. However, the ultimate resolution and outcome of litigation and regulatory proceedings is inherently difficult to determine, particularly where (a) the remedies or penalties sought are indeterminate, (b) the proceedings are in the early stages or the substantive issues have not been well developed, or (c) the matters involve complex or novel legal theories or a large number of parties. In accordance with applicable accounting guidance, IDACORP and Idaho Power, as applicable, establish an accrual for legal proceedings when those matters proceed to a stage where they present loss contingencies that are both probable and reasonably estimable. In such cases, there may be a possible exposure to loss in excess of any amounts accrued. IDACORP and Idaho Power monitor those matters for developments that could affect the likelihood of a loss and the accrued amount, if any, thereof, and adjust the amount as appropriate. If the loss contingency at issue is not both probable and reasonably estimable, IDACORP and Idaho Power do not establish an accrual and the matter will continue to be monitored for any developments that would make the loss contingency both probable and reasonably estimable. As of the date of this report, IDACORP's and Idaho Power's accruals for legal proceedings are not material to their financial statements as a whole; however, future accruals could be material in a given period. IDACORP's and Idaho Power's determination is based on currently available information, and estimates presented in financial statements and other financial disclosures involve significant judgment and may be subject to significant uncertainty. As available information changes, the matters for which IDACORP and Idaho Power are able to estimate the loss may change, and the estimates themselves may change.

For certain of those matters described in this report for which IDACORP or Idaho Power have determined a loss contingency may, in the future, be at least reasonably possible, IDACORP and Idaho Power have stated that they are unable to estimate the possible loss or a range of possible loss that may result from those matters. Depending on a range of factors, such as the complexity of the facts, the unique nature of the legal theories, the pace of discovery, the timing of decisions of the court or arbiter, and the adverse party's willingness to negotiate towards a resolution, it may be months or years after the filing of a case or commencement of a proceeding before IDACORP or Idaho Power may be in a position to estimate the possible loss or range of possible loss for those matters. For matters that affect Idaho Power’s operations, Idaho Power intends to seek, to the extent permissible and appropriate, recovery of incurred costs through the ratemaking process.

Pacific Northwest Refund Proceedings

On July 25, 2001, the FERC issued an order establishing a proceeding to determine whether there may have been unjust and unreasonable charges for spot market sales in the Pacific Northwest during the period December 25, 2000 through June 20, 2001, because the spot market in the Pacific Northwest was affected by the dysfunction in the California market. During that period, Idaho Power or IE both sold and purchased electricity in the Pacific Northwest. In 2003, the FERC terminated the proceeding and declined to order refunds, but in 2007 the Ninth Circuit issued an opinion, in Port of Seattle, Washington v. FERC, remanding to the FERC the orders that declined to require refunds. The Ninth Circuit's opinion instructed the FERC to consider whether evidence of market manipulation would have altered the agency's conclusions about refunds and directed the FERC to include sales originating in the Pacific Northwest to the California Department of Water Resources (CDWR) in the scope of the proceeding. The Ninth Circuit officially returned the case to the FERC on April 16, 2009.

On October 3, 2011, the FERC issued its order on remand. The FERC ordered that the record be re-opened to permit parties seeking refunds to submit seller-specific evidence in support of their claims for sales made during the period confined to December 25, 2000 through June 20, 2001. The seller-specific claims must show that a seller engaged in unlawful market activity with a causal connection to have directly affected the negotiation of the specific contract or contracts to which the seller was a party. IE and Idaho Power understand the order to provide that neither claims of general dysfunction in the California markets nor in the Pacific Northwest market will be sufficient to support claims. While directing a trial-type hearing, the FERC also directed that the hearings be held in abeyance so that the matter may be presented to a settlement judge. On November 2, 2011, each of the City of Seattle, Washington, the City of Tacoma, Washington, the Port of Seattle, and the California Parties (consisting of the California Attorney General and the California Public Utilities Commission) filed requests for rehearing, seeking to expand the scope of the October 3, 2011 order. The designated settlement judge has met with the parties and convened a settlement conference to establish settlement procedures. The FERC's Chief Administrative Law Judge memorialized certain settlement procedures to which the parties agreed in an order issued on November 23, 2011. IE and Idaho Power had reached a settlement with the California Parties in 2006 that disposed of their claims in the Pacific Northwest refund proceeding, as well as in California refund cases. Neither IE nor Idaho Power had sold power to the Port of Seattle during the relevant time period.

In the first quarter of 2012 Idaho Power reached a tentative settlement that would have disposed of all claims, other than those of the City of Seattle, had it been accepted by the FERC. On June 13, 2012, the FERC approved the settlement as it applied to the City of Tacoma and disapproved it in part, requiring certain modifications to the settlement that left unclear which other buyers of power were excluded from the settlement. On July 12, 2012, IE and Idaho Power filed a request for clarification and rehearing of the FERC's order. IE and Idaho Power have the right to withdraw from the settlement if they find the FERC's rehearing order to be unacceptable. On July 16, 2012, the FERC's Chief Judge issued an order requiring hearings in the refund proceedings to commence by April 2013.

IE and Idaho Power intend to continue to defend their positions in the Pacific Northwest refund proceedings vigorously. The FERC's October 3, 2011 order setting the matter for hearing and the June 13, 2012 order regarding the IE and Idaho Power settlement are subject to rehearing, clarification, and reconsideration. Idaho Power and IE are unable to predict when and how the FERC will act on the rehearing requests, which contracts (if any) would be subject to refunds, whether the FERC will order refunds, or how the refunds would be calculated. As a result of these factors, as of the date of this report Idaho Power and IE are unable to estimate the reasonably possible loss or range of losses that Idaho Power or IE could incur as a result of unsettled claims in this matter. While Idaho Power is unable to quantify or determine the outcome of claims made by parties that have not yet settled, the amount agreed upon in the settlement described above was immaterial to IDACORP's and Idaho Power's financial statements.

Water Rights - Snake River Basin Adjudication

Idaho Power holds water rights, acquired under applicable state law, for its hydroelectric projects. In addition, Idaho Power holds water rights for domestic, irrigation, commercial, and other necessary purposes related to project lands and other holdings within the states of Idaho and Oregon. Idaho Power's water rights for power generation are, to varying degrees, subordinated to future upstream appropriations for irrigation and other authorized consumptive uses.

Over time, increased irrigation development and other consumptive uses within the Snake River watershed led to a reduction in flows of the Snake River. In the late 1970s and early 1980s these reduced flows resulted in a conflict between the exercise of Idaho Power's water rights at certain hydroelectric projects on the Snake River and upstream consumptive diversions. The Swan Falls Agreement, signed by Idaho Power and the State of Idaho on October 25, 1984, resolved the conflict and provided a level of protection for Idaho Power's hydropower water rights at specified projects on the Snake River through the establishment of minimum stream flows and an administrative process governing future development of water rights that may affect those minimum stream flows. In 1987, Congress enacted legislation directing the FERC to issue an order approving the Swan Falls settlement together with a finding that the agreement was neither inconsistent with the terms and conditions of Idaho Power's project licenses nor the Federal Power Act. The FERC entered an order implementing the legislation in March 1988.

The Swan Falls Agreement provided that the resolution and recognition of Idaho Power's water rights together with the State Water Plan provided a sound comprehensive plan for management of the Snake River watershed. The Swan Falls Agreement also recognized, however, that in order to effectively manage the waters of the Snake River basin, a general adjudication to determine the nature, extent, and priority of the rights of all water uses in the basin was necessary. Consistent with that recognition, in 1987 the State of Idaho initiated the Snake River Basin Adjudication (SRBA), and pursuant to the commencement order issued by the SRBA court that same year, all claimants to water rights within the basin were required to file water rights claims in the SRBA. Idaho Power has filed claims to its water rights and has been actively participating in the SRBA since its commencement. Questions concerning the effect of the Swan Falls Agreement on Idaho Power's water rights claims, including the nature and extent of the subordination of Idaho Power's rights to upstream uses, resulted in the filing of litigation in the SRBA in 2007 between Idaho Power and the State of Idaho. This litigation was resolved by the Framework Reaffirming the Swan Falls Settlement (Framework) signed by Idaho Power and the State of Idaho on March 25, 2009. In that Framework, the parties acknowledged that the effective management of Idaho's water resources remains critical to the public interest of the State of Idaho by sustaining economic growth, maintaining reasonable electric rates, protecting and preserving existing water rights, and protecting water quality and environmental values. The Framework further provided that the State of Idaho and Idaho Power would cooperate in exploring approaches to resolve issues of mutual concern relating to the management of Idaho's water resources. Idaho Power continues to work with the State of Idaho and other interested parties on these issues.

One such issue involves the management of the Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer (ESPA), a large underground aquifer in southeastern Idaho that is hydrologically connected to the Snake River. House Concurrent Resolution No. 28, adopted by the Idaho Legislature in 2007, directed the Idaho Water Resource Board to pursue the development of a comprehensive management plan for the ESPA, to include measures that would enhance aquifer levels, springs, and river flows on the eastern Snake River plain to the benefit of both agricultural development and hydropower generation. In May of 2007, the Idaho Water Resource Board appointed an advisory committee, charged with the responsibility of developing a management plan for the ESPA. Idaho Power was a member of that committee. In January 2009, the Idaho Water Resource Board, based on the committee's recommendations, adopted a Comprehensive Aquifer Management Plan (CAMP) for the ESPA. The Idaho Legislature approved the CAMP that same year. Idaho Power is a member of the CAMP Implementation Committee and continues to work with the Idaho Water Resource Board, other stakeholders, and the Idaho Legislature in exploring opportunities for implementation of the CAMP management plan.

Idaho Power also continues its active participation in the SRBA in seeking to ensure that its water rights are protected and that the operation of its hydroelectric projects is not adversely impacted. While Idaho Power cannot predict the outcome, Idaho Power does not anticipate any material modification of its water rights as a result of the SRBA process.

Other Proceedings

IDACORP and Idaho Power are parties to legal claims and legal and regulatory actions and proceedings in the ordinary course of business that are in addition to those discussed above. However, as of the date of this report the companies believe that resolution of those matters will not have a material adverse effect on their consolidated financial statements. However, Idaho Power is also actively monitoring various environmental regulations that may have a significant impact on its future operations. Given uncertainties regarding the outcome, timing, and compliance plans for these environmental matters, Idaho Power is unable to determine the financial impact of these regulations but does believe that future capital investment for infrastructure and modifications to its electric generating facilities to comply with these regulations could be significant.