20250314Comments_3.pdf

The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Patrick White
Submission Time: Mar 142025 8:31AM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address:2005 Madsen Drive
Grace, ID 83241
Name of Utility Company: Rocky Mountain Power
Case ID: PAC-E-25-02
Comment: "I just want it to be known that I am in opposition to the reduced rates of exported energy
from our solar generation.
The current rate of return was going to be a 9 year investment to break even. If the rates are reduced
to less than half the solar panels will be deteriated to the point that they will never break the break
even point."
---------------------------------------------------------------
From: Carey Grzadzinski<[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, March 14, 2025 3:01 PM
To: secretary
Subject: solar exchange rate
Dear Secretary;
I discovered that RMP is proposing a rate exchange decrease for solar energy. Making this change
during our current contract obligation to the solar company and lone company, is grossly unfair to
those who in good faith took a chance with this green experiment. 1, as a senior,will now most likely
be dead before I reach the break even investment.That would be breaking the verbal and written
contracts we made.This proposal most likely end up with the courts in which I would certainly
support.
Regards,
Carey Grzadzinski
------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Lamonte John <[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, March 14, 2025 4:19 PM
To: secretary
Subject: Case PAC-F-25-02
Dear PUC,

My name is K. Lamontre John and I am a Rocky Mountain Power customer living in Malad, Idaho. In
2021 my wife and I retired and moved back to our hometown. We built a new home on Malad
Summit, a few miles north of town.
One of our goals and desires in building the new home was to create and live in a sustainable
house, essentially for the rest of our lives. One feature of our new home is a solar system that is not
off grid, but feeds the grid operated by Rocky Mountain Power. During the time we have lived here,
we have enjoyed the savings we expected and planned for with the solar system.
But recently we received a letter from Rocky Mountain Power that said they had requested a rate
change for those with "non-legacy" solar systems. The letter was somewhat vague in that it did not
identify the exact rate they had been crediting our account for energy produced above and beyond
what we use, but rather said it was somewhere between $.07 and $.18 per kilowatt hour. They told
us they had requested to reduce that rather to$.04 per kilowatt hour. They said they didn't want
customers without solar systems to be subsidizing the credit given to those with solar systems. I
must say I was offended by the suggestion that I have been subsidized when, in fact, I have been
producing energy and feeding the system; energy that RMP does not have to produce.
My reason for writing is to express my wishes that the PUC NOT approve this rate change as
proposed by Rocky Mountain Power. A simple solution, and one that I feel is most appropriate, is
for them to credit the accounts of those with solar systems at the same rate they change those
customers, If that means the rates change that might have credited those customers with higher
rates than they were charged,that should be corrected.
Just a final note-the company that sold us the system designed it to meet the needs of the house
that we built and that design was based on what RMC was charging. We spent$24,000 on the
system and expect it to keep providing the benefit it has under the design criteria. To change the
rules of the game after the fact seems unfair to me.
Thank you for considering my comments as you make this important decision.
Sincerely,
K. Lamonte John
K. Lamonte John
408 Pack Mule Lane
Malad, ID 83252