20250305Comments_2.pdf

The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Steve Erickson
Submission Time: Feb 28 2025 4:58PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 1439 Ranch Loop Rd.
Preston, ID 83263
Name of Utility Company: RMP
Case ID: PAC-E-23-17 (PAC-E-25-02)
Comment: "This is regarding Rocky Mountain Power's power grab to steal power from solar power
users. This power company has a monopoly in this area and they know that we have no choice but
to bow to their price fixing of our solar power generation back to the grid. It has been at a 1:1 ratio
(which is very fair)and they are proposing to cut the price by more than half to solar customers. I
have spent more than $45K on a solar power system to help save the environment with clean
energy,which is only benefiting the State of Idaho, and this power company wants to take
advantage of this setup in what appears to only pad their pockets. This is a highly provocative move
on their part and should be properly dealt with to protect Idaho citizens. This power company is
saying that the reason for these changes is to "ensure that customers are paid fair rates", and so
"customers without solar...are not subsidizing the rates for self-generating customers:" There is no
further explanation as to how this would even be true and is, quite frankly, absurd. While it is true
that I have received tax benefits for installing this EXPENSIVE solar system,this power company
seeks to rob me of the very reason I installed it. I am an Engineer and there needs to be proper
analyses with verifiable data to back their statements up, including how reducing my export price
will help reduce the overall power price point to the rest of the population (including solar power
generation customers). Please carefully review these thoughts and side against this egregious form
of theft.
Thank you for your attention on this important matter.
Steve Erickson "
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Collin Swainston <[e-mail]>
Sent:Wednesday, March 5, 2025 12:32 PM
To: secretary
Subject: RE: PAC-E-25-02 Proposed RMP Changes

Hello,
work with a solar company that has been around for almost 2 decades serving largely Idaho Power
and Rocky Mountain Power territory amongst other states. I am a general manager for office and
field operations and have been in the solar industry for 6 years now.
understand Rocky Mountain Power's proposal to do away with 1 to 1" net metering. I think anyone
who has been in the solar industry long enough understands that no matter where you go,
eventually most utilities will pull away from this structure as it is not scalable the larger solar gets.
However, I feel the changes proposed by Rocky Mountain Power are drastic and there's no "silver
lining" in their proposal for solar companies or customers. Rocky Mountain Power, like Idaho Power,
is a giant monopoly utility. I genuinely hope that the Public Utilities Commission can be an
equitable and responsible intermediary between Rocky Mountain Power and its customers realizing
that the ULTIMATE group that will be disadvantaged REGARDLESS of the decision will be solar
customers. No matter what, rates will continue to rise for non-generators. No matter what, Rocky
Mountain Power will remain profitable.The group that truly has the most to lose in this is solar
generators and solar companies alike.
Here are my issues with this proposal:
1.The decrease in export credits is drastic.There is no "On Peak"or"Off Peak"export benefit similar
to Idaho Power where you can at least make up some of the difference with battery storage.The
existing Watt Smart program does not make up for this lack. It is a band-aid.
2.The footwork for this change was all completed 6 years ago leaving 6 years for Rocky Mountain
Power to increase the number of generators KNOWING there would likely be many unsuspecting
customers going solar thinking changes may not happen for decades.They now have all of this
solar infrastructure benefiting them, ultimately paid for by THEIR customers, and now all of that
infrastructure just got a whole lot cheaper for them.To me,while I am sure they had their is dotted
and their is crossed, it feels a bit like a bait and switch.Which they can do, because they are a
monopoly. If they were going to make this change,why not do it years sooner, decreasing the
impact on new solar generators?
3.There are 6 years of solar customers who are NOT grandfathered to 1:1 net metering. Not just any
6 years, but 6 years of the greatest demand for solar in history. Many of those years had
HISTORICALLY low interest rates. It may be a small percentage of homes, but the percentage still
makes up A LOT of people. Is it not possible to grandfather a greater number of solar customers to
lessen the impact for them while virtually leaving RMP unscathed?
Regardless of"fault"or"they should've known",there will be many in Idaho who can't pay a solar
bill AND a solar loan payment and ultimately end up defaulting on lines, defaulting on mortgages.
4.This will virtually take solar companies out of the state of Idaho. I am not blind to the fact that

there are many bad companies in the industry. HOWEVER,there are solar companies that do
business in an honest and ethical way,that do have a very happy customer base, and that do
benefit the economy and the environment.We have shy of 100 employees. Many of whom their sole
experience is in the solar industry. I am sure Big Dog will find ways to continue to operate,we will
just operate mainly in other states.
5.Solar is not getting cheaper. Many utilities cite cheaper solar allowing for quicker breakeven thus
allowing them to decrease their rates because their solar generators are getting rich off the system.
This simply is not true. In my 6 years in the industry I have only seen prices increase due to demand,
continued supply chain issues, and technology improvements. Companies like Big Dog Solar still
see a below average profit margin to try to stay industry competitive.There is no room to decrease
price along with this rate slash.
My ask from the PUC:
1. Negotiate a more equitable payback rate. No more 1:1? Fine. Incentivize batteries and on-peak
generation. Make the payback rate more equitable for customers that are making Rocky Mountain's
Power infrastructure investment for them.This agreement should benefit BOTH parties. Not JUST
the monopoly. If there is no budge in this policy,the PUBLIC utilities commission will prove to
Idahoans that they are more interested in lining the utility's pockets than the consumers they are
put in place to protect.
2. Negotiate additional customers into the grandfathered rate structure.There are thousands of
great families who will have their investment value greatly reduced if this change takes effect.
I appreciate your consideration if you got this far. I am hopeful that the PUC can act in everyone's
best interest, including generations that come after us who are relying on us to make responsible
environmental and economic decisions that don't impact them negatively down the line.
Collin Swainston
620 Pheasant Ridge Dr
ChubbuckID 83202
208.242.3352 Office
*1 BIGOOG