20250428Comments_38.pdf

The following comments were submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Paul Christensen
Submission Time:Apr 25 2025 6:39PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address:2705 sagebrush
Twin Falls, ID 83301
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power company
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "I got my solar when it was 1 to 1 metering-then you changed the law where I'm lucky to get 2 to
1..im barely breaking even. Now you want to take even more of the power I produce and sell it back to me at
a higher rate..how is this fair. I think Idaho Power needs to reimburse me for my investment as I never would
have made it knowing they will steal my power in the future.This is not fair.All existing solar owners should
have grandfather rights or be reimbursed for our investment. I think we need a new power company that will
be fair to consumers and producers that won't steal from us..this is absolutely unfair and unscrupulous. "
----------------------------------
Name: Maria Coatney
Submission Time:Apr 25 2025 6:54PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address:2006 nw 12th st
Meridian , ID 83646
Name of Utility Company: Idaho power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "Why are those who are trying to save money and reduce the amount of electricity being ripped
off. We will be paying for 90-99%of the electricity we make to help save electricity.
Is Idaho power going to pay off all solar panels? I bought them to help save our resources and to help my
family.
Maria Coatney"
----------------------------------
Name:Jacob Torrez
Submission Time:Apr 25 2025 7:54PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 1670 Saratoga Street
Pocatello, ID 83201
1

Name of Utility Company: Idaho power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "There should not be any reduction is the export credit rate. If anything it should be raised. If
Idaho power is going to charge, on average 10.8 cents per kWh,the solar credit to show that increase, not a
decrease:'
-----------------------------------------
Name:Adam Spencer
Submission Time:Apr 25 2025 10:56PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 1165 Northern Pine drive
Twin falls, ID 83301
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "I do not believe this should be allowed.With the previous changes to get metering(switching to
peak and of peak hours), Idaho Power promised that the changes would break even to something similar to
what we had previous. Now I get the joy of a solar panel payment, and the same bill I had prior to solar.And
still provide the same amount of generated power for Idaho power to sell at a profit.
Now, Idaho Power want to increase that margin by almost 6 times, at the cost of their solar generating
customers.That's like going to work for a business, buying all the tools, promised pay of 8 dollars a job,only
to have the boss say no. Now that you've installed and paid for all the tools we have decided to pay you 1
dollar a job in the winter, and 2 in the summer. Meanwhile we will sell that job back to you for 8 per job. It's
highway robbery,when there's little cost to Idaho power to have some many power(revenue)generating
stations all over the state. If anything it should be a 1:1 ratio vs the-2:1 currently, or this preposterous offer
of 8:1.
Please don't allow this change to take place. It benefits no one but Idaho Power, and hurts the many
Idahoans who help to ensure steady power during the most demanding times of day. "
------------------------------------------
The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Rick Dudley
Submission Time:Apr 26 2025 7:36AM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address:22855 Aura Vista Way
Caldwell, ID 83607
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
2

Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "To Whom It May Concern,
am writing in strong opposition to Idaho Power's proposal to drastically reduce export credit rates for solar
customers.
Cutting compensation by 60-80%while continuing to charge full retail prices for electricity is both unfair
and short-sighted. It penalizes customers who invested in clean energy, many based on good-faith
expectations of stable policy. Reducing incentives now undermines trust and discourages future
investment in solar,which benefits all ratepayers by reducing demand on the grid.
Solar customers should not be treated as a threat to profits—they should be treated as partners in
building a stronger, more resilient energy future for Idaho.
urge the Commission to reject this proposal:'
-------------------------------
The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name:Joseph Gallagher
Submission Time:Apr 26 2025 9:25AM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 5135 N Sorrento Dr, N Sorrento Dr
BOISE, ID 83704
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "I currently have roof top solar panels. I oppose any reduction in the amount of payment I
receive from Idaho Power for the kilowatts I produce. I should receive the same price for a kilowatt that
Idaho Power charges. If the PUC changes the rate that Idaho power charges me or pays me, it is reducing
the value of my home as well as the value of the electricity I produce. "
--------------------------------------
The following comments were submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Nina Eells
Submission Time:Apr 26 2025 12:17PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address:504 Morning Dove Way
3

Marsing, ID 83639
Name of Utility Company: Idaho power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "Do not pass this proposal. It doesn't benefit the customer why would anyone get solar have a
solar loan just to benefit idaho power this is not fair. From the last proposal I wasn't grandfathered in for
generation kWh credit carry forward.This is a total rip off. It's not fair it's not for the customer. "
--------------------------------------
Name:John Danielson
Submission Time:Apr 26 2025 12:53PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address:2814 Salubria RD
Cambridge, ID 83610
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "As a solar owner I think it would be fair to have all kwh be offset and settled up annually rather
than be paid a pittance each month we over produce and get full bore price for under production. IP had
already cut payment and now want to cut again. I think they should have to cut the rates they charge
everyone else the way they cut ours. If the prices have gone down they should charge less too. We have
also incurred substantial costs to install systems and so that should not be IP go to for rate increases
unless we get that consideration too.
We are actually helping reduce the infrastructure needed. My understanding is that soon (micron fab plant)
and continued needs for population growth IP power production will be increasingly impacted.
Bottom line : as Idaho Power continuously seeks and gets increases it seems extremely unfair that they pay
us less. "
-----------------------------------
The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: robert nichols
Submission Time:Apr 26 2025 9:16PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 541 moonlite dr idaho falls, id 83402
Idaho Falls, ID 83402
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
4

Comment: "Dear Commissioners,
am writing to respectfully oppose Idaho Power's proposal to reduce the Export Credit Rate (ECR)for
customer-owned solar generation to approximately 2.46 cents per kilowatt-hour, effective June 1, 2025.
While I understand the need to ensure rates are fair for all customers,this drastic reduction undervalues
the significant benefits distributed solar provides to Idaho's electric grid and communities. Rooftop solar
generation:
Reduces peak demand and defers costly grid infrastructure upgrades.
Decreases transmission and distribution losses.
Supports grid resilience, especially during extreme weather and high-load events.
Contributes to Idaho's energy independence and local economic growth.
Idaho Power's proposal does not fully account for these benefits. By compensating solar exports at or near
wholesale market rates,the proposal shifts the value created by solar customers to Idaho Power itself,
without fair reimbursement.This creates a disincentive for private investment in clean energy, undermining
public policy goals and Idaho's growing clean energy economy.
Moreover, independent studies from other states (e.g., Minnesota's Value of Solar analysis) have shown
that properly accounting for the full grid and environmental benefits often results in a higher, not lower,
value for exported solar energy. I respectfully urge the Commission to require a full, independent, Idaho-
specific Value of Solar study before approving any further reductions to the ECR.
Idaho customers deserve a stable, predictable, and fair policy framework to make long-term energy
investments. Rapid and extreme reductions to the ECR threaten that stability, harm Idaho's solar industry,
and disadvantage customers seeking greater energy independence.
For these reasons, I respectfully request that the Commission reject the proposed ECR reduction, or at
minimum, suspend the change pending completion of a comprehensive,transparent valuation study of
distributed generation.
Thankyou foryour careful consideration of this critical issue."
-----------------------------------
The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name:Janet Calkins
Submission Time:Apr 27 2025 7:41AM
Email:[e-mail]
Telephone:[phone]
5

Address: 15660 Chaparral Ave
Caldwell, ID 83607
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-20
Comment: "I'm sure that I don't understand all the inner workings of our energy providers. I have solar
panels and each year it seems Idaho Power is decreasing the amount they want to credit us for the energy
we are providing(to ourselves, essentially) and want to charge us more money. Pretty soon, it won't be a
benefit to us at all to have them! Now I get another postcard stating they are decreasing the rates for
everyone else. That is just not fair! They say they want to decrease our energy credits because there are
more houses to provided energy to--more demand, but I say, let the new customers pay for their own
power. Why am I paying for it?!"
-------------------------------
The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Paul sommerfeld
Submission Time:Apr 27 2025 8:02AM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 14 sleepy glenn In
Carmen, ID 83462
Name of Utility Company: Idaho power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "Last year the change from net metering to net billing seemed reasonable.This new ECR
proposal would eliminate the incentive for new solar projects, negatively affect my solar investment and
my property value. It may also cause my solar installer to go out of business eliminating my warranty and
service contract. If Idaho Power can really buy power for less than 1 cent/kw should they be charging 8
cents. Please do not approve this proposal:'
--------------------------------
The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Penelope Steward
Submission Time:Apr 27 2025 9:02AM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 6739 S 18 E
Mountain Home, ID 83647
6

Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID:
Comment: "I'm a homebound retiree. The only reason I can stay in my home is because I installed solar
panels to offset the cost of my electricity. Now it seems that my"reward"for adding to the available power
supply is being eroded to a meaningless level. Why does IP get to unilaterally change the rates we
contracted when first induced to install these systems? Soon, IP will get my power free to them, but at high
cost to me!"
------------------------------
The following comments were submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Bonnie Merrill
Submission Time:Apr 27 2025 11:09AM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address:624 S. Fillmore
Jerome, ID 83338
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "Good morning Idaho Public Utilities Commission,
I have recently received a postcard from Idaho Power regarding the increase for solar panels.
When customers sign up for solar power, Idaho Power is paid to inspect and connect the service.Why are
our solar bills going up? It's because Idaho Power is not receiving enough money due to the amount of
customers converting to alternative energy methods. How is that fair?The economy is hard enough without
additional expenses from a company that is not struggling financially.
Please support the people and do NOT pass this bill.
Thank you!"
------------------------------
Name: Kenneth Alkire
Submission Time:Apr 27 2025 11:22AM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address:2598E 990S
Hazelton , ID 83335
Name of Utility Company: Idaho power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
7

Comment: "The proposed export credit rate is ridiculously low"
---------------------------
The following comments were submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Barbara Thiele
Submission Time:Apr 27 2025 12:17PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 3823 Osprey Cir, PO Box 302
New Meadows, ID 83654
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "Dear Commissioners,
am writing to urge you to have an independent, disinterested, qualified party evaluate the Integration
Cost Assessment and other aspects of the Export Credit Rate application IPC-E-25-15 submitted by Idaho
Power. (IDP)This independent, qualified evaluator must not profit from supporting more profit for IDP, as is
the case when all the assessment is done in-house. IDP has a vested interest in securing increasing profit
for its shareholders, not in looking out for the best and fair interest of its customers.That, of course, is your
responsibility and duty.
What IDP is proposing could have devastating impacts on many of us who scraped to find a way to
afford solar and now face an unreasonable increase in our costs. (Up to 80% in many cases! How can such
a huge change be justified,while at the same time IDP requests a decrease of 5.28% Fixed Cost
Adjustment in Case No. IPC-E-25-11 and another decrease in Power Cost Adjustment in IPC-E-25-20?) It is
your duty to question and thoroughly check the numbers, and to question the methodology you have
determined to be used. If the numbers are good, something is wrong with the methods. People must not be
made to suffer because of unfair and/or unreasonable methods and calculations.
Let me share my personal story,which illustrates the severe impact IDP's proposal will cause to many
people.
About 7 years ago my husband began to exhibit noticeable symptoms of dementia. He had promised
me our little 1600 square foot home in the Meadows Valley would take care of me in retirement. Not
wanting to give up my lifestyle and sell my little piece of paradise, I did everything I could to prepare for his
certain demise and death.
I took the inheritance we got from his brother and put the solar panels on my roof.An investment I felt
would reduce my monthly energy costs to a level that I could afford. I then did a reverse mortgage so I could
stay in my home. Finally, after Chuck's death, I got a part-time job and I now rent a room in my small house.
When I received IDP postcard it was a gut punch. My heart felt like it dropped into my stomach. How will
I afford this?Will I have to sell?Where will I go? Will I become a burden on my family?
So, I ask you to please determine what is truly fair,just, reasonable and non-discriminatory by having a
qualified, independent, disinterested party make an assessment. I know there are others like me—retired,
on a reduced income, and just trying to do the right thing for ourselves and our families.
And I ask you to look at the benefits independent energy generators give both to IDP and all IDP
8

customers across Idaho.We provide clean energy to the grid at high use times when customers'air
conditioners are sucking it off the grid. Residential solar reduces transmission losses and helps reduce
wear on grid infrastructure. Our contribution to the energy system here in Idaho is an incredible deal for
IDP. We've made the investment,we pay for the maintenance on our systems, and IDP and all its
customers reap benefits. It should be a win-win situation. It isn't fair or just for IDP to bleed us out. If this
application is approved,there will be harm. In some cases, it could be devastating.
I urge you to fulfill your responsibility, do your due diligence, and get an independent assessment and
weigh the justice and fairness of this ECR proposal before making your decision.
Respectfully,
Barbara D.Thiele
New Meadows, ID"
-------------------------
Name: Shirley Lawson
Submission Time:Apr 27 2025 12:41 PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 1850 N Elk Rd
Pocatello, ID 83204
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "I am opposed to the proposed reduction in compensation rates (ECR)for excess solar energy
sent back to the grid. We have invested heavily in solar energy equipment for our home that does NOT
currently fully cover our electric expenses year round, and we STILL end up paying significant monthly
power bills during winter months. This proposed reduction will further erode our ability to be good
stewards of the environment, and drastically stretch our fixed monthly income resources. "
-----------------------
Name: Mike Garmire
Submission Time:Apr 27 2025 12:53PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 20582 Antrim Dr
Greenleaf, ID 83626
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "The government pushed us to buy solar panels back when we got them.The solar companies
made it sound like we were getting a lot of our money back with the credits, Idaho power told us we'd get
kW for kW back.What really happened was the government changed its mind on solar,the credits were tax
credits that we saw very little from, and Idaho Power is now trying to work with the government so that we
9

don't get anything back.As someone who has lived in Idaho all my life, I feel like we really got the shaft on
this. Please, please, make this easier on people who bought their panels, at least up through 2024"
--------------------------
The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Casey Huse
Submission Time:Apr 27 2025 3:05PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 1703 W Norcrest Ct
Boise, ID 83705-4431
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "I'm strongly against Idaho Power's request to significantly lower compensation for solar
generated power.Those like myself who have invested in the technology did so based upon historic rates-
this reduction will significantly increase our payback timeframe, making a huge negative change to terms
after the investment has already been made. It also seems questionable considering they are requesting a
reduction in rates for non-solar users at the same time. Existing solar customers should continue to be
grandfathered in with rate protection as they have been in the past:'
--------------------------------
The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Steven J Lawson
Submission Time:Apr 27 2025 4:56PM
Email:[e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 1850 North Elk Road
Pocatello, ID 83204
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "I am opposed the proposed reduction in compensation rates (ECR)for excess solar energy sent
back to the grid.We have invested heavily in solar energy equipment for our home that does NOT currently
fully cover our electric expenses year-round and we STILL end up paying significant monthly power bills
during winter months. This proposed reduction will further erode our ability to be good stewards of the
environment and drastically stretch our fixed monthly income resources"
------------------------------
10

The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Bianca Kennedy
Submission Time:Apr 27 2025 4:24PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address:2764 S Velvet Falls Way
Meridian, ID 83642
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-20
Comment: "I am writing to voice my deep concern and disappointment in Idaho Power's ongoing effort to
drastically reduce their solar power customers'compensation rates.The huge decrease in rates for these
responsible and environmentally-minded home owners is an assault to solar power customers
everywhere. If Idaho Power gets away with what could be viewed as theft from their loyal cusomers, other
states may then try to follow suit. It is unspeakable how the very people who are trying to do right by Idaho,
will have the longtime agreement that their solar power transaction was created on -the very way how they
were able to plan ahead to afford and finance solar power-virtually reneged with the"stroke of a pen:'This
will leave Idahoans and Idaho Power customers with a horrible opinion of Idaho Power and create righteous
resentment about another big company doing wrong by it's own customers, by obliterating the foundation
on which their solar relationship was forged with Idaho Power.This will also matter to generations of power
customers to come.And this will reflect just as horribly on the IPUC. Independent studies do not support
the need for such a dramatic and financially harmful l rate adjustment.The bottom line is that if this affront
to solar-power-using homeowners goes through, Idaho Power and IPUC will both be joining the ranks of
companies who put profits over people...and in this case, over the environment and energy production too.
The impact will be devastating to the clean energy movement, discouraging future homeowners in buying
clean energy or trusting any agreements such interactions are built upon.The most devastating impact will
be the utter loss of trust customers will ever have again in Idaho Power, and in similar, powerful companies.
Thankyou for reading my message. Please do not give into the pressure you may be facing to do the wrong
thing. Please take a courageous stand and do right by the people of Idaho.
Respectfully,
Bianca"
---------------------------------
The following comments were submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Steven J Lawson
Submission Time:Apr 27 2025 5:03PM
Email:[e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 1850 North Elk Road
11

Pocatello, ID 83204
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "I am opposed the proposed reduction in compensation rates (ECR)for excess solar energy sent
back to the grid.We have invested heavily in solar energy equipment for our home that does NOT currently
fully cover our electric expenses year-round and we STILL end up paying significant monthly power bills
during winter months. This proposed reduction will further erode our ability to be good stewards of the
environment and drastically stretch our fixed monthly income resources:'
---------------------------
Name: Eric Ratzlaff
Submission Time:Apr 27 2025 5:05PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 17 S. Midland Blvd
Nampa, ID 83651
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "Along with many others here in Idaho, I was convinced to "go solar" as a way to reduce my
energy bills. It was explained to me that my solar production would offset my usage, essentially zeroing out
my Idaho Power bill. Unfortunately,this has not been the case, as Idaho Power has sought to decrease their
compensation to energy producers like myself, effectively RAISING the price I pay,while non-producers are
unaffected.This is beyond unfair! It punishes individuals such as myself who have purchased expensive
solar systems simply as a way to increase their profits. I am aggrieved and outraged by this abusive
proposal by Idaho Power. Please stop them from taking this action, and prevent any such future attempts:'
-----------------------------------
Name: Mario Camacho
Submission Time:Apr 27 2025 5:45PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address:2325 S Marcum Way
nampa, ID 83686
Name of Utility Company: Idaho power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "I don't want the rate to raise "
-----------------------------
12

Name: matthew wright
Submission Time:Apr 27 2025 9:47PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address:6131 N Seawind Pl
meridian, ID 83646
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "Hello there,
wanted to add my voice to the many concerned citizens about the proposal of re-evaluating the ECR
credits. I believe that this move is going to cripple both the solar industry and all of the solar customers that
are dependent on the excess energy credit providing a financial offset for the investment. I dont believe the
proposed values are justified and are designed to turn this market near completely in Idaho Power's favor.
The monopolitized move of snuffing out anything that stands as any type of threat to them is obvious, and
now its requiring that the citizens of a free market to come and defend their options.
I don't believe that this is ethical or justified. If anything, Idaho Power needs to be re-evaluated, as well as
their outlandish proposals of decimating anything that was once a benefit to being a solar customer.
thank you,
Matt Wright"
-------------------------------------
From: Lindy Cubberley([e-mail])Sent You a Personal Message
Sent:Saturday,April 26, 2025 5:27 PM
To: secretary
Subject: IPC-E-25-15 Public Comment
Dear Idaho Public Utilities Commission,
A rooftop solar system offers numerous benefits, including reduced electricity bills, increased property
value, energy independence, and environmental advantages.These systems generate clean, renewable
energy, reducing reliance on fossil fuels and contributing to a healthier environment.They also offer cost
savings and can even generate income by selling excess energy back to the grid.
?m very concerned about Idaho Power?s proposal to slash rooftop solar compensation rates by up to 80%.
Paying rooftop solar owners less than 1 ?/kWh for the power they put onto the grid for eight months out of
the year,while then charging regular customers at least 8?/kWh for that same electricity, is extremely
unfair.
Last year's solar rate changes, coupled with the increased fixed service charges,were already devastating
for Idaho Power customers. Please do a thorough review to check the utility's math and assumptions, listen
13

to outside experts and customers, and don't let this monopoly utility unfairly squeeze money out of its
customers and undercut their right to generate their own power.
Also, please improve the public process by adding a virtual testimony option (as is provided at Public
Service Commissions in all neighboring states)to help ensure you can hear the important perspectives
from everyone who will be impacted by Idaho Power?s changes.Written comments and public hearings
with limited times and locations are not enough.
Thankyou.
Sincerely,
Lindy Cubberley
1607 Trekker Ridge
Pocatello, ID 83201
[e-mail]
[phone]
This message was sent by KnowWho, as a service provider, on behalf of an individual associated with Sierra
Club. If you need more information, please contact Member Care at Sierra Club at
[e-mail] or(415)977-5673.
------------------------
From: Scott Burlingame([e-mail]) Sent You a Personal Message
Sent:Saturday,April 26, 2025 3:42 PM
To: secretary
Subject: IPC-E-25-15 Public Comment
Dear Idaho Public Utilities Commission,
Regarding Idaho Power's proposal to reduce compensation for electricity sent to the grid by rooftop solar
production:
1.Rooftop solar is clean, reliable, and affordable.A fair process for the sharing of and compensating for
solar energy is in everyone's interest.
2. Public utility monopolies should serve multiple goals--reliable delivery of services, incentivization of a
transition to clean technology, and fair treatment of early adopters.
3. Idaho Power proposes a rate structure intended to serve one goal--maintain profits as high as possible.
The PUC has a responsibility to balance the needs of the community with the reasonable requirements of
the monopoly being regulated.The proposed new rate is not balanced. It is solely about profits.
?m very concerned about Idaho Power?s proposal to slash rooftop solar compensation rates by up to 80%.
Paying rooftop solar owners less than 1 ?/kWh for the power they put onto the grid for eight months out of
the year,while then charging regular customers at least 8?/kWh for that same electricity, is extremely
unfair.
14

Last year's solar rate changes, coupled with the increased fixed service charges,were already devastating
for Idaho Power customers. Please do a thorough review to check the utility's math and assumptions, listen
to outside experts and customers, and don't let this monopoly utility unfairly squeeze money out of its
customers and undercut their right to generate their own power.
Also, please improve the public process by adding a virtual testimony option (as is provided at Public
Service Commissions in all neighboring states)to help ensure you can hear the important perspectives
from everyone who will be impacted by Idaho Power?s changes.Written comments and public hearings
with limited times and locations are not enough.
Thankyou.
Sincerely,
Scott Burlingame
3520 Kingswood Drive
Boise, ID 83704
[e-mail]
[phone]
This message was sent by KnowWho, as a service provider, on behalf of an individual associated with Sierra
Club. If you need more information, please contact Member Care at Sierra Club at
[e-mail] or(415) 977-5673.
--------------------
The following comments were submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Glenn Peterson
Submission Time:Apr 28 2025 8:22AM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address:511 STresa Pl
Star, ID 83669
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "I am firmly opposed to the recent proposal dated April 3, 2025 that would significantly reduce
compensation rates for excess solar energy sent back to the grid.
Many environmentally aware citizens have invested heavily to help reduce harmful gases into the
environment as well as reduce reliance on fossil fuels.
15

Enacting a regulation that would REDUCE the positive effect of these investments in solar energy not only
hurts the environment but hurts those who have cooperated by acting upon the problem.
Please reconsider this regulation change and put forth regulations that help the environment as well as
those who invest their hard earned money to support the fight against climate change.
Thank you for your consideration
Glenn Peterson"
--------------------------------
Name: Glenn Peterson
Submission Time:Apr 28 2025 8:24AM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 511 S Tresa Pl
Star, ID 83669
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "I am firmly opposed to the recent proposal dated April 3,2025 that would significantly reduce
compensation rates for excess solar energy sent back to the grid.
Many environmentally aware citizens have invested heavily to help reduce harmful gases into the
environment as well as reduce reliance on fossil fuels.
Enacting a regulation that would REDUCE the positive effect of these investments in solar energy not only
hurts the environment but hurts those who have cooperated by acting upon the problem.
Please reconsider this regulation change and put forth regulations that help the environment as well as
those who invest their hard earned money to support the fight against climate change.
Thank you for your consideration
Glenn Peterson"
----------------------------
Name: Reggie Scheierman
Submission Time:Apr 28 2025 8:31AM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 5469 Cole Street
Chubbuck, ID 83202
16

Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power Company
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "I an a home owner and customer with Idaho Power at the above address. I made a major
purchase to place solar panels on my residence.These panels are still financed and with the present
formulas in place,this is a break even situation. If Idaho Power is allowed to keep changing the
reimbursement formula,this will be a losing proposition for myself and many more customers.We made
these purchases in good faith with the reimbursement situation as it is. It hasn't been that long since the
first formula change and I am requesting that Idaho Power not be allowed to change it again.Thanks,
Reggie Scheierman "
---------------------------------
Name: Steven Williams
Submission Time:Apr 28 2025 8:50AM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 12 Goodwin Drive
Blackfoot, ID 83221
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "Idaho Public Utilities Commission, case number IPC-E-25-15.
Your path forward is clear—Force Idaho Powerto change the operational status of 13,700 Idaho Power
customers, impacted by this change to"legacy status".
If our systems were established and operational as of 1/1/2025,then"legacy status"is our right under your
"Net Billing"policy that reduces the compensation paid to residential solar owners for their excess power.
You further allowed Idaho Power to modify"Net Billing"to be calculated using time-adjusted rates on an
annual basis, as opposed to a kWh-for-kWh exchange rate based on retail prices."
---------------------------------
The following comments were submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Paul Litow
Submission Time:Apr 28 2025 9:41AM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 1993 Succor Creek Rd.
Homedale, ID 83628
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
17

Comment: "I do not favor Idaho Power's proposed ECR decrease.
We made a very substantial investment in rooftop generation in 2024. Part of the calculus for that decision
was that: 1)we could very substantially reduce our annual power needs, 2)we could significantly reduce
our annual power bill, and 3)the system would pay for itself in 10 years. Idaho Power's proposal to
decrease the ECR upends all of this.
Idaho Power's proposal is a continuation of its gutting of net metering in 2023. The company is clearly
uninterested in paying a fair price for locally generated power despite the fact that it trumpets the benefits
of said generation (i.e., avoided energy generation/purchase requirements, avoided transmission and
distribution costs, avoided line losses). Idaho Power clearly desires to further profit from on-site generation
by further reducing the cost it pays for that power. It is notable that it already receives 25%of our—and
others'—net generation for free while simultaneously charging customers for that free electricity.
I strongly urge you to deny Idaho Power's requested ECR decrease. Its proposal contravenes its own logic
regarding the benefits of on-site generation, discourages investment in such systems, and ultimately
increases reliance on an already-overburdened grid. "
------------------------------------
Name:Joel Bennett
Submission Time:Apr 28 2025 9:50AM
Email: kjbenet1991 @outlook.com
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 1360 Sw 3rd Ave
Fruitland, ID 83619
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "I was contacted by my solar company on a issue were Idaho Power would like to drop our
compensation credit down again!!
I installed my solar panels back in 2022. Going on to Idaho Powers website they boasted how they wanted
solar to be a big part of there future. So I decided to invest. Since then,you the PUC, have approved Idaho
Power to cut my credit rate in half. So now I have a solar payment and a power bill. And now they want to
cut it in half again. Why??? I get it they can buy it cheaper from farms but I am not a farm I paid a lot of
money to do the right thing. Idaho Power a multi million dollar company, says we don't want to pay for your
electricity. When I put my system in they controlled how big of system I could do, I could not make more
than I used. I guess they were looking to the future on how to rip off the average Idahoan.
What is the kicker is they are still taking my power and going back on their word about doing the right
thing. I didn't ask for anything except offset what 1, as a home owner, uses. So as the Public Utilities
Commission you are suppose to protect the customer the average person in Idaho. As a long time Idahoan
you should have our backs and stop Idaho Power from taking from the citizens of Idaho.
Oregon did not allow this to happen. They stopped Idaho Power!Who ever thought Oregon would take
18

care of their citizens better than Idaho.
PROTECT the people of Idaho because you are the only hope against big corporations.
Please stop this!
Joel Bennett"
-----------------------------
From: PUCWeb Notification
Sent: Monday,April 28,2025 9:00 AM
To: ConsumerComplaintsWeb
Subject: Notice:A complaint was submitted to PUCWeb
The following complaint was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Dann Danley
Submission Time:Apr 28 2025 8:50AM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address:22753 Zephyr Ct
Caldwell, ID 83607
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Contacted Utility:Yes
Comment: "I received the new Export Credit Rate flyer in the mail.
I am extremely disappointed on how you are treating people who made the investment in solar setups that
feed back to the grid. Totally unacceptable and I do NOT approve. Less that 1 c per kwh? Seriously?"
----------------------------------
The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name:Anton Korzh
Submission Time:Apr 28 2025 10:36AM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 898 E Joplin Ln
Eagle, ID 83616
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "Dear Idaho Public Utilities Commission,
19

Asa solar owner with three solar systems in Idaho, I am strongly opposed to Idaho Power's IPC-E-25-15
proposal to reduce energy generation credits to 1 cent per kWh in winter and 2 cents per kWh in summer.
My systems generate approximately 16 MWh annually, matching my consumption. In 2024, 1 exported 12
MWh and imported 12 MWh. Recent credit reductions have already increased my energy bill by$1,000 per
year, severely impacting the return on investment for my solar installations,which is now negative.
While I understand that a 100%credit is not feasible due to losses, Idaho Power sells my excess solar to
neighbors at 10 cents per kWh. Losses should be limited to around 10%, so there is no justification for
credits at the current—50% level, let alone the proposed 10%.This drastic reduction feels like an attempt
by Idaho Power to profit from our solar systems,which would be unfair and potentially illegal.
urge the Commission to reject this proposal and increase energy credits to 75-85%of the retail rate to
reflect fair compensation for solar owners. I will also seek legislative action to establish a minimum
threshold for generation credits to prevent such proposals in the future.
Sincerely,Anton Korzh"
-----------------------------------
The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Russel Lodge
Submission Time:Apr 28 2025 1:56PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address:4004 N Sandpoint Way
Boise, ID 83702
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "As a solar homeowner with Idaho Power, I strongly oppose the proposed changes in Case IPC-
E-25-15.These changes seem unfair, and are aimed at maintaining the power monopoly and reduce the
ability of individuals to generate their own power.With such a small percentage of homeowners having
solar panels I can only speculate this legislation is a move for Idaho Power to maintain control into the
future by doing what is best for the company and not the people they are supposed to serve.
I could understand these changes if there was enough home solar to cause issues with the overall system,
but we are far from there yet.
These changes would unfairly reduce the value of the clean energy I generate and make it harder for Idaho
families to protect themselves from rising utility rates.
I invested in solar based on the promises of fair compensation for the energy I produce, and these changes
feel like moving the goalposts. Please protect homeowners'rights to energy freedom and reject this
proposal:'
--------------------------
20

The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name:James Thomas
Submission Time:Apr 28 2025 2:13PM
Email:[e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address:668 S Whisperwood Way
Boise, ID 83709
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "How about the PUC "just say'No"'to IPCo?
In fact, a CEO of a company I worked for several years ago said that regulated monopolies are quasi-gov't
and are about 20%inefficient. We made millions based on that 20%. Perhaps the PUC needs to go pro-
active and "find the fat" at IPCo and eliminate it:'
----------------------------
The following comments were submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Dale Studer
Submission Time:Apr 28 2025 3:40PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address:957 Cahoon
Pocatello, ID 83201
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "When I first installed my roof top solar in 2023 it was a kwh for a kwh.A year later it changed to
the current system which was a significant increase in cost to me. Now here we are a year later and they are
wanting to change and lower the rate again. It feels like I am being punished for having solar panels. I am
not trying to make money off producing electricity but it felt more fair when it was a kwh for a kwh you could
at least save power for when your not producing. I understand Idaho Power is in business to make money.
But to pay me a discounted rate for the power I produce and charge full price for power that I use doesn't
seem fair. Had I known this was the way it was going to be I wouldn't have installed them to begin with. I
belief last time the commission allowed the change they said it was to be fair to those who don't have solar
panels but they have the same opportunity to install panels as I did and elected not to. I have made
significant investment in solar panels and just want to be treated fairly. "
------------------------------
Name: DEAN AND MICHELLE WILDE
21

Submission Time:Apr 28 2025 3:49PM
Email:[e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 1412 Camelback View Dr
Pocatello, ID 83201
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "When we first had solar panels installed to our home,we were under the impression that we
were doing the right thing to help society in the following ways:
1- On a small scale,we would help Idaho Power in general to help meet the increasing demands for
electricity.
2- By adding solar panels,we were under the impression that we would help reduce the carbon footprint
and do our part to generate cleaner electricity.
3- We were led to believe that this would benefit all stake holders including ourselves.
Obviously,we felt there would be a financial incentive to us as homeowners,that our electricity costs
would decrease. However,this appears to have been a mistake and something we were misled on. Going
forward, I would absolutely not recommend moving towards solar to any of my family and friends. The fact
that if this ECR is approved my electric bill will increase by 34%shows that movement towards solar is
more expensive for me as well as to other interested parties. I am absolutely opposed to this filing. "
---------------------------------
22