20250516Comments_41.pdf

From: Bryan Lawley<[e-mail]>
Sent:Thursday, May 15, 2025 4:27 PM
To: secretary<[e-mail]>
Subject:#IPC-E-25-15
Please post this attached comment to your public comment thread as I had issue doing it
through your website.Thanks.
Best,
�. Bryan Lawley/ President
208.602.9583
SOLAR EGT Solar
0000000 208.795.5170
© ® 401 N Main Street
Meridian, ID 83642
IPUC Commissioners:
I write this lengthy comment in absolute disgust that this ID Power proposal is even a
consideration given your already rash decision to allow ID Power to make the first changes
that came into effect in early 2024, despite being shown clear and obvious data that blew
ID Powers internal employee study out of the water. This might sound like someone beating
a dead horse, but your jobs are to regulate a utility on behalf of the consumer not on behalf
of our monopoly utility that continues to post record profits year over year. The vastly
conflicting data provided to you in 2023 in the"Crossborder" Energy study clearly was
ignored at the expense of ID consumers/business leaders/and employees alike. If the
Crossborder study had results even within 20% of the internal employee VOIDER study
provided by ID Power I am sure you would not be hearing resonating revolts on this topic.
However, when a professional firm that was paid a healthy sum to conduct a professional
study with over 150% difference in perceived value of an excess generated Kwh one would
think this would give the commissioners grave concern that ID Power was showing clear
and evident bias to protect long-term profits from a cheaper/cleaner source of energy than
what they will ever be able to provide to rate payers. Now to be fair I know there are
"former"commissioners that on their way out made this choice probably not thinking or
caring what this would do to the ID energy landscape and future generations behind us that
now may not even have a choice to create/store their own energy but rather be stuck in a
Lifetime contract with I D Power with no alternative to avoid what will be record rate/fee
1

inflation with the population outrunning the grid infrastructure whether that is admitted by
ID Power or not. Let me remind you once again that your mission as stated directly on your
website as an IPUC commissioner is to"Determine fair,just, reasonable and
nondiscriminatory rates and utility practices for electric, gas, telephone and water
consumers • Ensure the delivery of safe, reliable and efficient utility services." I highlight
the"nondiscriminatory"as that is exactly what the previous and current rate structures are.
As a consumer first, I have to wonder several things that I think outside of your job as a
commissioner you should have to answer to: 1)Why would ID Power spend millions of
dollars to attack solar net metering rate payers which are still today less than 1% of the
total rate paying class?Seems odd in any instance that this would not be look upon as
absolutely"discriminatory". If distributed roof-top solar and battery storage were not a
Long-term competitive threat to any utility these egregious rate cases would not be
happening all across the United States as they are and will continue to be until for profit
utilities pave the way to continue being the"only game in town". If memory serves me
correctly the supposed net annual losses attributable to net metering clients were
$275,000. This seems incredibly petty given your decision to have a sliding tier service
charge increase ultimately to $25/month that puts $41 M!!!! in revenue in ID Powers pocket
every$5 increase annually yet our private solar market is being gutted by the changes
already made. #2) Is there anything more"discriminatory"than allowing ID Power to
continue to contract large scale solar/wind/hydro PPA's that will make them millions in
profit in the coming years yet not allow a consumer to take advantage of the same at their
respective residence.This is simply business 101..anything ID Power owns or commits to
offload or purchase energy from for pennies on the dollar creates more margin/profit
whereas if they don't own it then that margin doesn't exist and that simply is unfair to any
consumer. #3) How would you perceive the optics of our Governor being the only ID
politician to receive max campaign contributions from ID Power being allowed or to be part
of appointing IPUC commissioners and expect no bias? I personally don't think that is
possible especially given our corrupt political society of today.
Now on to more simple logic questions. Why would the IPUC want to be the entity that
essentially takes the opportunity away from ID consumers for what is the cleanest/most
efficient/most abundant source of energy in the world? Native Idahoans such as I choose
to live in this incredible environment for the mountains/lakes/rivers/public lands and a
myriad of other unbeatable advantages. These advantages are threatened by the approval
of this proposal as distributed energy and battery storage unarguably reduce stress on the
grid at peak times and can mitigate blown transformers that can and have caused recent
fires late last season. Now ID Power is out teaching outage preparedness workshops to get
ahead of what will be far more and far longer planned outages than we have ever seen in ID.
2

How does it make sense to deter solar/battery storage knowing ID Power liability exposure
to more fires and along with that way more outages?
None of this on the surface makes any sense aside from ID Power profiting further off
distributed solar that does nothing but help their already stressed grid at peak times. I urge
the IPUC to put a hard stop to these continued anti-competitive measures and stand up for
ID consumer rights to choose how they want to produce and store their energy. If that is
staying with ID Power for the rest of their lives great...if it is investing in clean energy even
better but to not have that choice is simply not what ID has ever stood for.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following comments were submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Ken Cook
Submission Time: May 15 2025 4:03PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 24135 Stephen Ln
Parma, ID 83660
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-1
Comment: "Outrageously overpriced for the power we provide back! Compensation
started out great and now changed not offsetting the cost of the product! "
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name: Darryl Melville
Submission Time: May 15 2025 4:46PM
Email: darryltm msn.com
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 3365 NW Princess Place
Mountain Home, ID 83647-6276
Name of Utility Company: Darryl Melville
Case ID: IPC-E-25-1
3

Comment: "I am a solar customer and I strongly oppose Idaho Power's proposal in case
IPC-E-25-15 to reduce compensation for the excess energy I send back to the grid.
I invested in solar based on fair compensation for the clean energy my system produces.
Changing the rules now would hurt homeowners like me and discourage others from going
solar.
This proposal is unfair, short-sighted, and not in the best interest of Idaho families or our
energy future. I urge the Commission to reject Idaho Power's plan and protect fair solar
compensation:'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following comments were submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Noel Schoneman
Submission Time: May 15 2025 4:01 PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 904 N. Hannah Place
Star, ID 83669
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "I am a solar customer and I strongly oppose Idaho Power's proposal in case
IPC-E-25-15 to reduce compensation for the excess energy I send back to the grid.
I invested in solar based on fair compensation for the clean enercy my system produces.
Changing the rules now would not only hurt homeowners like me and discourge others
from going solar, but it would hurt Idaho long term and short term by minimizing the
opportunity to produce solar power for the good of all.
This proposal is unfair, short-sighted, and not in the best interest of Idaho families or our
energy future. I urge the Commission to reject Idaho Power's plan and protect fair solr
compensation:'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4

Name: Steven Paquette
Submission Time: May 15 2025 4:03PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 387 wooddale ave
Eagle, ID 83616
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "I am a solar customer and I strongly oppose Idaho Power's proposal in case
IPC-E-25-15 to reduce compensation for the excess energy I send back to the grid.
I invested in solar based on fair compensation for the clean energy my system produces.
Changing the rules now would hurt homeowners like me and discourage others from going
solar.
This proposal is unfair, short-sighted, and not in the best interest of Idaho families or our
energy future. I urge the Commission to reject Idaho Power's plan and protect fair solar
compensation."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name:Thomas Orthmeyer
Submission Time: May 15 2025 4:10PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 5074 N Goddard Creek Wa
Meridian, ID 83646
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "I am a solar customer and I strongly oppose Idaho Power's proposal in case
IPC-E-25-15 to reduce compensation for the excess energy I send back to the grid.
I invested in solar based on fair compensation for the clean energy my system produces.
Changing the rules now would hurt homeowners like me and discourage others from going
solar.
5

This proposal is unfair, short-sighted, and not in the best interest of Idaho families or our
energy future. I urge the Commission to reject Idaho Power's plan and protect fair solar
compensation:'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name:Tim Murphy
Submission Time: May 15 2025 4:13PM
Email: mrfdogwork yahoo.com
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 3240 E. Sweetwater Dr.
Boise, ID 83716
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "Idaho Power's request here is just preposterous. I installed my solar system
two years ago and my meter has not stopped running backward since then (i.e., I have
provided more power to Idaho Power than I have drawn from them; a lot more). I now have
two power bills each month: the finance bill for the solar system (10 year note); and my
Idaho Power bill. This is just ridiculous. I was never going to make any money off of this
deal in the first place because IP does not actually pay me for the power; it can only ever be
a credit against the amounts they charge me. I did it because it was the responsible thing
to do. Under the current rate structure, I'm already losing money, but this latest proposal
(90% differential between what they pay me and what I pay them)would completely wipe
out the investment I made in my solar system (—$20K). The purpose of regulating monopoly
utilities is to prevent exactly this type of nefarious conduct. They're actively destroying
even the slightest competition to their monopoly when the total financial impact to their
business isn't even material to their balance sheet. In other words, they are financially
devastating a whole class of rate-payers simply because they can, not because it is a
business necessity. "
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name: Michael Collins
Submission Time: May 15 2025 4:21 PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 14365 Western Larch Way
Nampa, ID 83651
6

Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "Dear Idaho Public Utilities Commission,
As a solar customer, I am writing to express my strong opposition to Idaho Power's
proposed reduction in compensation for excess energy sent back to the grid, as outlined in
case IPC-E-25-15.This proposal represents a misguided approach that undermines the
principles of fair compensation and hampers the growth of clean energy in Idaho.
Investing in solar energy is a significant commitment for homeowners, including myself.
These investments are made with the expectation of fair and reasonable compensation for
the clean energy produced. Reducing the pay for excess energy effectively penalizes those
who have taken steps to generate renewable power and does so at the expense of
encouraging widespread adoption of solar technology.
Furthermore, this proposal is shortsighted and disregards the broader benefits of
distributed solar generation, such as reduced strain on the grid, lower greenhouse gas
emissions, and increased energy resilience. Disincentivizing solar payments could slow
progress toward Idaho's energy sustainability goals and hinder the economic benefits that
solar can bring to local communities.
Idaho Power's plan demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the value that
distributed solar cars and homeowners contribute to the energy system. A fair, transparent,
and equitable approach to compensation is essential to support Idaho families, stimulate
Local economic growth, and promote a resilient, sustainable energy future.
I urge the Commission to reject Idaho Power's proposal and uphold fair compensation for
excess solar energy. Doing so will foster continued investment in renewable energy, benefit
Idaho's environment, and ensure a sustainable energy future for all residents.
Sincerely,
Michael Collins"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7

Name: ANN TRIGUEIRO
Submission Time: May 15 2025 4:30PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 5122 N ELISHA AVE
MERIDIAN, ID 83646
Name of Utility Company: IDAHO POWER
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "I am a solar customer and I strongly oppose Idaho Power's proposal in case
IPC-E-25-15 to reduce compensation for the excess energy I send back to the grid.
I invested in solar based on fair compensation for the clean energy my system produces.
Changing the rules now would hurt homeowners like me and discourage others from going
solar.
This proposal is unfair, short-sighted, and not in the best interest of Idaho families or our
energy future. I urge the Commission to reject Idaho Power's plan and protect fair solar
compensation."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name: Blaine Akers
Submission Time: May 15 2025 4:37PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 10642 W Seabreeze Ave
MOUNTAIN HOME, ID 83647
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "> I am a solar customer and I strongly oppose Idaho Power's proposal in case
IPC-E-25-15 to reduce compensation for the excess energy I send back to the grid.
> > I invested in solar based on fair compensation for the clean energy my system
produces. Changing the rules now would hurt homeowners like me and discourage others
from going solar.> >This proposal is unfair, short-sighted, and not in the best interest of
Idaho families or our energy future. I urge the Commission to reject Idaho Power's plan and
protect fair solar compensation.> "
8

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name: Christina Winder
Submission Time: May 15 2025 4:40PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 1515 E. Washington Ave
Nampa, ID 83686
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: ""On April 3, 2025, Idaho Power submitted a proposal to the Idaho Public
Utilities Commission (PUC)to significantly reduce compensation rates (ECRs)for excess
solar energy sent back to the grid:'
I would like the Idaho Public Utilities Commission to reject this proposal. "
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name: Michael Murray
Submission Time: May 15 2025 4:57PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 5699 West Hidden Springs Drive
Boise, ID 83714
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "I am a solar customer and I strongly oppose Idaho Power's proposal in case
IPC-E-25-15 to reduce compensation for the excess energy I send back to the grid.
I invested in solar based on fair compensation for the clean energy my system produces.
Changing the rules now would hurt homeowners like me and discourage others from going
solar.
This proposal is unfair, short-sighted, and not in the best interest of Idaho families or our
energy future. I urge the Commission to reject Idaho Power's plan and protect fair solar
compensation:'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9

From: Mark Araki <[e-mail]>
Sent:Thursday, May 15, 2025 6:27 PM
To: secretary<[e-mail]>
Subject: Comment on case number IPC- E-25- 15
IPUC,
I would like to speak out against Idaho Powers proposal to reduce residential export rates. I
am a residential solar owner and feel that it is unfair to devalue the power that I export to
my local Pocatello grid. Idaho Power imports my excess at a very reduced rate and sells to
its customers at retail and I feel that it is quite unfair. My excess power is used locally with
no line losses and no infrastructure investment by the power company and should be
valued appropriately. I did not put solar on my roof to make money but I don't think Idaho
Power should be able to take advantage of my willingness to contribute to the resiliency of
our power grid. Please deny this unfair proposal.
Thankyou,
MarkAraki
118 Fairway Cir, Pocatello, ID 83201
208-221-6180
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Matt Dickey([e-mail]) Sent You a Personal Message
<[e-mail]>
Sent:Thursday, May 15, 2025 7:36 PM
To: secretary<[e-mail]>
Subject: IPC-E-25-15 Public Comment
Dear Idaho Public Utilities Commission,
In late 2023 1 installed solar on my house. The idea was I would pay off the cost in 15 years
or so and also create clean energy which is important to me. Idaho Power is now asking to
decrease the credit they give me from 8 cents to 1 cent or less for 8 months of the year.That
will make it unlikely I will ever pay off my investment. And Idaho Power will still charge
customers 8 cents when they are crediting me 1 cent. This is extremely unfair and will
decimate the home solar power industry in Idaho and severely impact those already with
solar panels installed. Please do not allow this to happen.
I?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.
10

Last yearandapos;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 utilityandapos;s math and assumptions, listen to outside experts and customers, and
donandapos;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,
Matt Dickey
805 S 19th Ave
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 member.carePsierraclub.org or [phone].
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:Jonathan <[e-mail]>
Sent:Thursday, May 15, 2025 10:18 PM
To: secretary<[e-mail]>
Subject: Case comment form IPC-E-25-15
Good evening,
I have tried numerous times to with multiple devices to submit a comment on this case.
Each time I try to submit a comment I receive an error notice, followed by instructions to
contact the "help desk". No number or email was provided for said "help desk". I would like
to know if this error has been fixed, and whether other customers have been possibly
effected by this issue. Thanks have a great weekend.
WR
Jonathan Walker
11

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Mirel Reyes ([e-mail]) Sent You a Personal Message
<[e-mail]>
Sent:Thursday, May 15, 2025 10:20 PM
To: secretary<[e-mail]>
Subject: IPC-E-25-15 Public Comment
Dear Idaho Public Utilities Commission,
I?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 yearandapos;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 utilityandapos;s math and assumptions, listen to outside experts and customers, and
donandapos;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,
Mirel Reyes
5590 W. Lucky Dr.
Boise, ID 83703
reyes.mirel0bgmail.com
[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 member.carePsierraclub.org or [phone].
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12

From: Jane Chandler([e-mail]) Sent You a Personal Message
<[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2025 10:23 PM
To: secretary<[e-mail]>
Subject: IPC-E-25-15 Public Comment
Dear Idaho Public Utilities Commission,
Idaho Power cannot be trusted to treat solar customers fairly and the studies they have
shared with the PUC are both self serving and harmful to the public good. I urge the PUC to
reject Idaho Powers Proposal and start a fair and equitable process to understand the both
costs and benefits of rooftop solar that include environmental, infrastructure resilience,
community impacts and how the extensive growth Idaho is seeing plays a role in power
needs.
I?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 yearandapos;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 utilityandapos;s math and assumptions, listen to outside experts and customers, and
donandapos;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,
Jane Chandler
1407 E. Jefferson St.
Boise, ID 83712
13

a [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 member.care([e-mail] or [phone].
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following comments were submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: John Staebler
Submission Time: May 15 2025 6:11 PM
Email: johnstaeblerP9mail.com
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 1927 Stonetree Dr, Mountain Home, ID 83647 Mountain Home, ID 83647-3773
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-1
Comment: "I am a solar customer and I strongly oppose Idaho Power's proposal in case
IPC-E-25-15 to reduce compensation for the excess energy I send back to the grid.
I invested in solar based on fair compensation for the clean energy my system produces.
Changing the rules now would hurt homeowners like me and discourage others from going
solar.
This proposal is unfair, short-sighted, and not in the best interest of Idaho families or our
energy future. I urge the Commission to reject Idaho Power's plan and protect fair solar
compensation."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name: Stephanie Drake
Submission Time: May 15 2025 7:20PM
Email: seaad mac.com
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 1720 W TENZING ST
NAMPA, ID 83686
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-1
14

Comment: "I am a solar customer and I strongly oppose Idaho Power's proposal in case
IPC-E-25-15 to reduce compensation for the excess energy I send back to the grid.
I invested in solar based on fair compensation for the clean energy my system produces.
Changing the rules now would hurt homeowners like me and discourage others from going
solar.
This proposal is unfair, short-sighted, and not in the best interest of Idaho families or our
energy future. I urge the Commission to reject Idaho Power's plan and protect fair solar
compensation."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following comments were submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Diane Barker
Submission Time: May 15 2025 5:05PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 829 E Blue Heron St
Meridian, ID 83646
Name of Utility Company: ID Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "I invested in solar based on fair compensation for the clean energy my system
produces. Changing the rules now would hurt homeowners like me and discourage others
from going solar. This proposal is unfair, short-sighted, and not in the best interest of Idaho
families or our energy future. I urge the Commission to reject Idaho Power's plan and
protect fair solar compensation."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name: Gwynn Gonzales
Submission Time: May 15 2025 5:06PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 2547 S Whitetail Court
Nampa, ID 83696
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
15

Comment: "I am a solar customer and I strongly oppose Idaho Power's proposal in case
IPC-E-25-15 to reduce compensation for the excess energy I send back to the grid.
I invested in solar based on fair compensation for the clean energy my system produces.
Changing the rules now would hurt homeowners like me and discourage others from going
solar.
Please reject this proposal! "
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name: Patrick Poor
Submission Time: May 15 2025 5:08PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 16700 Mulberry Ct.
Nampa, ID 83687
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "Please do not reduce the reimbursement rate of solar power from residential
customers:'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name: Jake and Laurie Avey
Submission Time: May 15 2025 5:27PM
Email:jakelau r1 @yahoo.com
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 4351 S. MartinelAve.
Meridian, ID 83642-5304
Name of Utility Company: Idaho power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "I am a solar customer and I strongly oppose Idaho Power's proposal in case
IPC-E-25-15 to reduce compensation for the excess energy I send back to the grid.
16

I invested in solar based on fair compensation for the clean energy my system produces.
Changing the rules now would hurt homeowners like me and discourage others from going
solar.
This proposal is unfair, short-sighted, and not in the best interest of Idaho families or our
energy future. I urge the Commission to reject Idaho Power's plan and protect fair solar
compensation."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name: Jen Odell
Submission Time: May 15 2025 5:31 PM
Email: thejeneffectC� maiLcom
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 16987 S Vista Ave
Kuna, ID 83634
Name of Utility Company: Idaho power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "I am a solar customer and I strongly oppose Idaho Power's proposal in case
IPC-E-25-15 to reduce compensation for the excess energy I send back to the grid.
I invested in solar based on fair compensation for the clean energy my system produces.
Changing the rules now would hurt homeowners like me and discourage others from going
solar.
This proposal is unfair, short-sighted, and not in the best interest of Idaho families or our
energy future. I urge the Commission to reject Idaho Power's plan and protect fair solar
compensation."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name: David Bartle
Submission Time: May 15 2025 5:45PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 2533 N Bruins Circle
Boise, ID 83704
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
17

Comment: "If Idaho Power succeeds in this application to dramatically reduce what they
pay for solar, and if their justification is that the price they are willing to pay is market value,
I would expect an equally dramatic reduction in my kwh rate during those same times of
day.
I am not a solar owner at this point, I was waiting to see what the export credits as
approved by PUC last year would look like. I was satisfied with that outcome as it pertained
to the rate schedule for my business. Fortunately, I had to delay the project until this year
so a bad decision avoided. I would never have expected this dramatic a proposal from
Idaho Power so soon. Even if this application is rejected or heavily modified in favor of solar
owners, it's clear to me that Idaho Power wants to kill rooftop solar."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name: Alfred Koenig
Submission Time: May 15 2025 6:01 PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 11660 Lawrence Drive
Caldwell, ID 83607
Name of Utility Company: Myself
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: " I am a solar customer and I strongly oppose Idaho Power's proposal in case
IPC-E-25-15 to reduce compensation for the excess energy I send back to the grid.
I invested in solar based on fair compensation for the clean energy my system produces.
Changing the rules now would hurt homeowners like me and discourage others from going
solar.
This proposal is unfair, short-sighted, and not in the best interest of Idaho families or our
energy future. I urge the Commission to reject Idaho Power's plan and protect fair solar
compensation:'
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
18

Name: Richard Froehlich
Submission Time: May 15 2025 6:29PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 8905 E. Sego Lily Dr.
Nampa, ID 83687
Name of Utility Company: CHISELS OF FIRE
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "Idaho Power has all ready reduced the benefits of Solar Energy credits, now
they want to do it again. They have told us for years that Solar is the smart move for
consumers, but now are penalizing us for this. Those of us that allready have moved to
solar are seeing our bill increase over the past 2 years, so the savings vs. the investment
equation is going away. Idaho Power doesn't seem to care about us. Stop them from
further reducing the benefits of solar power!"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name: candace Loesby
Submission Time: May 15 2025 7:35PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 452 W Great Basin Dr
Meridian, ID 83646-5910
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "The proposed decrease in the solar export credit rate is very disappointing and
and affront to those who have invested in clean energy by installing and benefitting from
solar panels.
An estimated increase of about 34%for residential on-site generation customers is
outrageous. Also, it's very concerning that the proposal includes $0.00 compensation rate
for non-summer on-peak extra generation, and only$0.009540 for non-summer off-peak
extra generation. The proposed Summer Off-Peak compensation of$0.017682 is also
inordinately low. Another consideration is to change the on-peak hours to 2PM to 10PM (at
the latest), since solar powered systems don't generate after the sun sets.
19

My request is that the Commissioners reject the proposed billing change and re-set
compensation rates to reflect a higher value for the avoided costs Idaho Power experiences
because of residential solar-power generators.
Thankyou."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name: Jim Rowberry
Submission Time: May 15 2025 7:54PM
Email: mommy memoriesCbyahoo.com
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 30503 Pet Ln
Parma, ID 83660
Name of Utility Company: Idaho power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "ID We are still being charged large power bills (more than we ever paid without
solar). With our solar payment we pay$1000.00 a month for electric power. This makes it
almost impossible to be cost effective. Idaho power utilizes our excess power and makes a
profit at the expense of solar customers. There has to be an ethical line that cannot be
crossed. "
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name: Richard Beery
Submission Time: May 15 2025 8:18PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 8088 Rustin Road
Middleton, ID 83644
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "I am a solar customer and I strongly oppose Idaho Power's proposal in case
IPC-E-25-15 to reduce compensation for the excess energy I send back to the grid.
I invested in solar based on fair compensation for the clean energy my system produces.
Changing the rules now would hurt homeowners like me and discourage others from going
solar.
20

This proposal is unfair, short-sighted, and not in the best interest of Idaho families or our
energy future. I urge the Commission to reject Idaho Power's plan and protect fair solar
compensation:'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name: Jessica Brenckle
Submission Time: May 15 2025 8:24PM
Email: go robin go(Ebyahoo.com
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 11331 West Pattie Court
Boise, ID 83713
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "Hello.
I'm reaching out to comment against the ECR decrease being approved, as filed by Idaho
Power Company. I understand that Idaho Power is a business and wants to make money,
but that much of a decrease would not only effect home owners, but companies that install
solar. This will essentially kill solar for the valley and Idaho Power doesn't seem to care.
My fiance installed our system himself and put his blood, sweat, and tears into it. If
approved, we will be in debt for longer, and the other over 700 residential properties may be
in the same boat. With the proposed ECR it would take some people 60 years.
Idaho only receives 3.49% of its electricity from solar energy, and 86% of buildings in Boise
are deemed solar-viable.We have so much potential for growth! The City of Boise has a
goal of powering it's facilities with 100% renewable energy by 2030 and the community by
100% clean electricity by 2035. We should not be going backwards, we should be looking
towards the future.
Thank you for taking the time to read my comments:'
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
21

Name: Sheryl Tanner
Submission Time: May 15 2025 8:48PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 6358 Foothill Rd
Star, ID 83669
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "I am an Idaho Power customer and a solar panel owner. I oppose the proposal
to reduce compensation for energy we send back to the grid. It is unfair to reduce the
compensation now after we have invested so much in solar panels, thinking we would get
fair returns. "
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name: Byron McCombs
Submission Time: May 15 2025 9:07PM
Email: b1mccombs2001 @gmail.com
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 5248 S Missoual Way
Boise, ID 83709
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: " am a solar customer and I strongly oppose Idaho Power's proposal in case
IPC-E-25-15 to reduce compensation for the excess energy I send back to the grid.
I invested in solar based on fair compensation for the clean energy my system produces.
Changing the rules now would hurt homeowners like me and discourage others from going
solar.
This proposal is unfair, short-sighted, and not in the best interest of Idaho families or our
energy future. I urge the Commission to reject Idaho Power's plan and protect fair solar
compensation."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
22

Name: Mary Pierce
Submission Time: May 15 2025 9:09PM
Email: idahoclann1(a)gmail.com
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 7068 W. Stratton St.
Boise, ID 83704
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "I purchased solar panels two years ago. Helping any way I can with
climate/planet.We have to take steps for our future generations. Yes any savings is
appreciated on power savings. If you reduce what a solar customer gets back will make any
other person question if they want to install solar. We need to do what we can- can't Idaho
Power help us with that!!"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name: Jonathan walker
Submission Time: May 15 2025 10:13PM
Email: ionathanfwalker(a)protonmail.com
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 4102 W Silver River St
Meridian, ID 83646-7026
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "I installed solar energy on my residence in good faith based on current
compensation rates. I think it would be completely inappropriate to change compensation
rates after residential customers already made sizable investments. If Idaho Power
changes these rates it will damage customer trust and damage future investments. I also
believe that having the extra capacity provided by solar customers will possibly help with
power shortages that may occur in the future."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
23

Name:Walter Burfeindt
Submission Time: May 15 2025 10:16PM
Email: butchburfeindt(a)gmail.com
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 6805 S Santa Cruz Dr
Boise, ID 83709
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "I am a solar customer and I strongly oppose Idaho Power's proposal in case
IPC-E-25-15 to reduce compensation for the excess energy I send back to the grid.
I invested in solar based on fair compensation for the clean energy my system produces.
Changing the rules now would hurt homeowners like me and discourage others from going
solar.
This proposal is unfair, short-sighted, and not in the best interest of Idaho families or our
energy future. I urge the Commission to reject Idaho Power's plan and protect fair solar
compensation:'
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name: Andrew Huang
Submission Time: May 16 2025 12:09AM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 140 E Provident Dr
Boise, ID 83706
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "I strongly protest Idaho Power's reduction in rates for energy exported from on-
site generation systems. The nearly tenfold reduction in the rate is simply unfair and
destroys the incentive to develop robust decentralized power systems.
Andrew Huang"
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
24

The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Charlie Anderson
Submission Time: May 16 2025 1:36PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 2005 E Presidential Dr
Meridian, ID 83642
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-15
Comment: "I am a solar customer and I strongly oppose Idaho Power's proposal in case
IPC-E-25-15 to reduce compensation for the excess energy I send back to the grid.
I invested in solar based on fair compensation for the clean energy my system produces.
Changing the rules now would hurt homeowners like me and discourage others from going
solar.
This proposal is unfair, short-sighted, and not in the best interest of Idaho families or our
energy future. I urge the Commission to reject Idaho Power's plan and protect fair solar
compensation."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
25

From: Leigh Ford <[e-mail]>
Sent:Thursday, May 15, 2025 5:08 PM
To: secretary<[e-mail]>
Subject: IPC-E-25-15 Public Comment by Snake River Alliance
Please find our comments for IPC-E-25-15 pasted below and attached. Thank you for the
opportunity.
Leigh Ford
Snake River Alliance
PO Box 1731
Boise, ID 83701
snakeriveralliance.org
IPC-E-25-15 Public Comment by Snake River Alliance
Since 1979, Snake River Alliance has served as Idaho's nuclear watchdog and clean energy
champion. We envision an Idaho where our people and our environment are free from the
threat of nuclear waste and contamination, and our communities are healthy, strong, and
prosperous because of our reliance on clean and renewable energy.
The Snake River Alliance is deeply concerned about Idaho Power's recently proposed
rates. If approved by the PUC, local businesses and Idahoans who have invested in solar
since 2020 will be seriously impacted. If Idaho Power is allowed to make the steep cuts it
proposes in the rates they currently pay rooftop solar owners, businesses would suffer
because it increases the payback time and makes solar panels much less appealing for
family budgets.
We have already seen the impact on local business. From 2016 through 2019 the Snake
River Alliance partnered with two local solar companies to carry out a "Solarize the Valley"
campaign. Over 120 systems were installed, totaling nearly 1 megawatt in capacity,
representing a $2.5 million investment in renewable energy. The community interest was
such that new employees were hired providing good-paying jobs for Idahoans.
Unfortunately, Idaho Power rates changed at the end of 2019, making it too difficult for
many people to afford solar panels. The company we hired was bought out by a company in
Virginia.
The new proposal would reduce those rates from October through May to less than 1
cent per kilowatt-hour—an 80% decrease from the current amount, basically taking
power from people who paid for the energy-creating infrastructure. This is not fair, and it's
unsustainable for solar businesses. Rooftop solar provides value to the community, and it's
an affordable, reliable, local clean power source for Idaho Power.
We urge the PUC to SAY NO to Idaho Power's proposal.
1

Leigh Ford, Executive Director
Snake River Alliance
lford - snakeriveralliance.org
snakeriveralliance.org
##Leigh Ford (she/her)
Executive Director
Snake River Alliance
On Shoshone and Bannock land
[phone] (cell)
[phone] (office)
snakeriveralliance.org
"It is an eternal reminder to a generation depending on nuclear and atomic energy, a
generation depending on physical violence, that love is the only creative, redemptive,
transforming power in the universe."
—Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.-
2

SNAKE RIVER ALLIANCE
IDAHO'S NUCLEAR WATCHDOG
10 IV AND CLEAN ENERGY CHAMPION
Snake River Alliance
PO Box 1731
Boise, ID 83701
snakeriveralliance.ora
IPC-E-25-15 Public Comment by Snake River Alliance
Since 1979, Snake River Alliance has served as Idaho's nuclear watchdog and clean
energy champion. We envision an Idaho where our people and our environment are
free from the threat of nuclear waste and contamination, and our communities are
healthy, strong, and prosperous because of our reliance on clean and renewable
energy.
The Snake River Alliance is deeply concerned about Idaho Power's recently proposed
rates. If approved by the PUC, local businesses and Idahoans who have invested in
solar since 2020 will be seriously impacted. If Idaho Power is allowed to make the
steep cuts it proposes in the rates they currently pay rooftop solar owners, businesses
would suffer because it increases the payback time and makes solar panels much less
appealing for family budgets.
We have already seen the impact on local business. From 2016 through 2019 the
Snake River Alliance partnered with two local solar companies to carry out a "Solarize
the Valley" campaign. Over 120 systems were installed, totaling nearly 1 megawatt in
capacity, representing a $2.5 million investment in renewable energy. The community
interest was such that new employees were hired providing good-paying jobs for
Idahoans. Unfortunately, Idaho Power rates changed at the end of 2019, making it too
difficult for many people to afford solar panels. The company we hired was bought out
by a company in Virginia.
3

The new proposal would reduce those rates from October through May to less than
1 cent per kilowatt-hour—an 80% decrease from the current amount, basically
taking power from people who paid for the energy-creating infrastructure. This is not
fair, and it's unsustainable for solar businesses. Rooftop solar provides value to the
community, and it's an affordable, reliable, local clean power source for Idaho Power.
We urge the PUC to SAY NO to Idaho Power's proposal.
Leigh Ford, Executive Director
Snake River Alliance
[e-mail]
snakeriveralliance.ora
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4

Greetings,
The attached pdf are the comments from the Portneuf Resource Council regarding IPC-E-
25-15.
Thank you for the opportunity to input on this important case before the Idaho PUC.
Sincerely,
Mike Engle, Chair
Portneuf Resource Council
208 284 3825
5

�/
_ �/
PORTNEUF RESOURCE COUNCIL
flo Advocates for Clean Water and Clean Energy in Southeast Idaho
Dear Idaho Public Utilities Commission,
This letter is concerning Idaho Power's (IPC) proposed changes to the Solar Export
Credit Rate, case number IPC-E-25-15. I am writing on behalf of the Portneuf Resource
Council (PRC), a 501 (c)(3) non-profit that advocates for clean energy and clean water
in Southeast Idaho. Since coordinating a successful Solarize Pocatello campaign in
2019 and with ongoing residential solar advocacy, PRC has grown to about 50
members and nearly 400 clean energy supporters.
PRC appreciates Idaho Power's commitment to achieving 100% renewable energy by
2045 and IPC's efforts to expand clean energy options through programs like "Clean
Energy Your Way." However, the proposed drastic reduction in the export credit rate (up
to 80%!) is deeply concerning and threatens to undermine the growth of the residential
and commercial solar industry in Idaho, harm local solar businesses, and infringe on
Idahoan's energy independence and participation in clean energy solutions.
Key Concerns:
• Unfair Valuation: The current proposal reduces the export credit rate (ECR)
from approximately 4 cents per kWh to less than 1 cent during eight months of
the year. This drastic change is unfair and untenable for existing solar owners
and the optics of high volatility in yearly changes to the ECR will continue to deter
Idahoans from investing in clean energy.
• Flawed and Bias-Driven Model: The proposed rate changes rely heavily on
Idaho Power's VODER Study, which is based on a model of avoided costs. While
elements of the model could be debated, our primary concern is that the data
sources and assumptions used in the model are flawed, biased, and self-serving.
These biased inputs lead to undervalued and distorted estimates of the actual
value of distributed energy resources. This was shown by the independent,
third-party study by Crossborder Energy (funded by organizations such as Idaho
Conservation League, Sierra Club, PRC and others). This study shows a more
accurate and substantially higher value of distributed energy resources. The
IPUC and Idaho Power's dismissive approach to these independent findings
raises serious concerns about fairness and transparency.
• Fair Compensation and Transparency: The Oregon Public Utility Commission
and other regulators have employed more balanced methods, such as using a
6

3-year rolling average of market prices, to stabilize the annual and potentially
volatile changes to the ECR. The Commission should require transparent,
reviewable calculations for capacity contributions and avoided transmission costs
to ensure fairness for all customers. Moreover, the assumption that all integration
costs are equal between utility-scale and distributed solar is inaccurate and
unsupported.
• Monopoly and Control: The rate proposal reflects an effort by Idaho Power to
establish monopoly control over electrical energy in Idaho, discouraging
distributed energy resources and threatening local jobs and economic
development in the residential and commercial clean energy sector. Instead IPC
should be investing in the advantages of micro grids and community solar as a
measure of resilience against terrorism and power outages.
• Impact on Customers and Community: Many Idahoans invest in solar in good
faith, expecting stable and fair compensation. Due to the change to ECR for
compensation of excess energy and the volatility of this proposal, many current
residential and commercial solar owners are unable to realize a return on
investment for their systems. The proposal to devalue their exports ignores the
broader benefits of distributed generation, including grid resilience, reduced
transmission costs, and local economic development.
• Broader Economic, Health, and Climate Benefits: Investing in clean energy
brings significant but often hard-to-quantify benefits, including economic growth
through new jobs and local business opportunities, improved public health by
reducing air and water pollution, and meaningful contributions to reducing carbon
emissions. Transitioning away from fossil fuels helps mitigate the most severe
impacts of climate change, such as droughts, flooding, and wildfires, which
already threaten Idaho's farms, ranchlands, communities and ecosystems. These
vital benefits should be recognized and factored into rate and policy decisions,
rather than overlooked in pursuit of short-term utility cost savings. Objectives of
IPC's 20 year Integrated Resource Plan include lowering costs and risks;
however these broader community aspects, that affect all Idahoans, are not
considered, but should be.
PRC Recommendations:
• The Commission should reject Idaho Power's current proposal to drastically
reduce the export credit rate.
• Adopt a multi-year rolling average of market prices to determine the avoided
energy component of the ECR.
• Ensure full calculation transparency in capacity contributions, avoided
transmission costs, and integration costs.
• Better yet, revisit and utilize an independent, third-party analysis to evaluate a
more accurate value of distributed energy resources.
7

• In a show of good faith, IPC should compensate net billing customers for the
historical errors in their ECR calculations.
• Encourage innovative programs such as virtual power plants and capacity
payments to empower customer participation and grid benefits.
Fair and transparent rate design is critical to supporting Idaho's clean energy future,
safeguarding customer rights, and fostering a resilient, innovative energy system. We
urge the Commission to deny the current proposal and instead adopt a balanced,
equitable approach that recognizes the true value of distributed energy resources.
Thank you for your attention to this important matter.
Sincerely,
Mike Engle, Chair
Portneuf Resource Council
208 284 3825
www.PortneufResourceCouncil.org
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
s

Date May 15th, 2025
RECEIVED
TO: IPUC
RE: IPC-E-25-15. (ECR rate change proposal) 17i1325 HAY 15 PM 4: 20
FROM: DAVID CHAMBERLAIN (208-608-2894)
PUBLIC
Hello Idaho Public Utilities Commission
I oppose the new ECR rates proposed by Idaho Power for Schedule 6. 1 think they are way to low, I
would like to see the current rates maintained. I also continue to oppose the methodology of
calculating the ECR.
Key Points
1) The rates for summer peak, summer non-peak, and non summer are down 17.3%, 68.7%, and a
whopping 80.3%.
2) In my last 2 cycles I generated 956 KW hours, and 1.43 MW hours of energy with my solar
panels. Of those numbers 654 and 1068 KW hours were excess. Enough to power a good sized
home for those 2 months. I was paid or given a credit of$31.63 and $51.65 for those excess
hours. Idaho Power's proposed new rates say I should have been paid or given a credit of$6.24
and $10.19 instead for those hours.
3) So while not stating it this way, they are saying residential on site solar power generation during
non-peak times is worthless to them.
4) 1 would love to know then what the financial arrangements are for the following agreements, which
were pending IPUC review as of a few days ago.
1) Power Purchase Agreement Blacks Creek Energy Ctr
2) Jackalope Wind LLC
3) North Valmy Power Plant
4) Hailey CSPP
5) Crimson Orchard Solar LLC
6) Birch Creek
I was told those agreements are not public. Is the agreed upon purchase price for a KWH under
a penny for those agreements? Why can't we see their rates if they can see ours?
5) Are we getting the short end of the stick because we don't have a collective bargaining group or
because we don't yet have feasible battery solutions? Maybe we are just a nuisance for Idaho
Power and one they are determined to squash. I understand there are 11-12,000 of us on
schedule 6. 1 also understand that the schedule 6,8, & 84 customers generate about 145,000
MWH of EXCESS energy (56K in summer and 89K non summer.). I understand Idaho Power sells
approx: 15AM MWH (6.2M in summer and 9.2M non-summer). So the Excess energy put back
on the grid by schedule 6 customers is less than 1% of the total energy needs of Idaho Power. If
it truly is an insignificant amount, and we are worthless to them for 9 months of the year plus the
non peak summer hours, then they have spent a huge effort inventing and maintaining an ECR
that drives closer to zero each cycle. If we are more significant, then it seems a fairer rate is in
order.
6) The implementation of the ECR basically doubled the breakeven time of my net investment of
about $20K from 10-12 years to 20+ years. This proposed changes renders it almost worthless.
9

7) 1 don't know if you still have confidence in Idaho Power's methodology for setting the ECR. I have
none. Not that I am an expert in any of this. But you first put Idaho Power solely in charge of
building this process. As I recall all pleas for participation by other experts, solar power
equipment industry players, conservation groups, ordinary citizens like me were all rebuffed.
Idaho Power built the process, then Idaho Power valued everyone's energy with a"preliminary"
rate while we were all still watching. But then their final rate proposal, which came months after
the ECR methodology approval, was substantially below their "preliminary" rate as I recall. But
you approved it. Now this declaration of near worthlessness other than peak times.
8) During last years confusion it was clever to see the peak time change definition from 1-9 pm to
3-11 pm. I'm sure they were watching out for us, paying the higher rate for all that solar power
generated from 9-11 pm. (Cynical). I would like to see it moved back t0 1-9 pm
9) 1 can't wait until next year's review of the ECR where we learn that it actually is a burden for Idaho
Power to accommodate residential on site solar power generation and therefore we actually need
to pay Idaho Power for any excess generation that they have to dispose of.
10)The original argument by Idaho Power was that the now Schedule 6 customers were being
subsidized by everyone else. If you now approve this rate change please make sure that the
general rate goes down by the same amount. It should be easy for them to make that specific
change. They should not be able to calculate that specific change for schedule 6 customers but
then claim immateriality for the general rate changes.
I plead with you not to be the Idaho Power Utilities Commission, rubber stamping their proposal, but
keep at least a token of the public in your decisions.
10