20250728Comments_2.pdf

The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Jamie Harmon
Submission Time: Jul 26 2025 1:48PM
Email: iamiemharmonCa�yahoo.com
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 328 Treaty Hwy.
Pocatello, ID 83202
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-16
Comment: "This rate increase request is excessive. To increase by more than 17%will be
crippling to many of the residents of our area, who are already struggling greatly with the
increased cost of living. Please deny Idaho Power's request:'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1

r
RECEIVED
Denise La Fever
6706 N Salvia Way D125 JUL 28 AM 11: 04
Meridian, ID 83646 �, ,,� 'PUBLIC
y I�.lU.U. Cp�iiMISSION
[e-mail]
907-250-8511
July 23, 2025
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
P O Box 83720
Boise, Idaho 83720-0074
RE: Public Comment on Case No. IPC-E-25-16-Opposition to Idaho Power's Proposed
13.09% Rate Increase
Dear Commissioners,
write as a concerned Idaho resident and ratepayer to express strong opposition to the
proposed 13.09% rate increase submitted by Idaho Power under Case No. IPC-E-25-16.
While I understand the utility's need to maintain infrastructure and ensure reliability,the
magnitude and structure of this rate increase place an unfair and disproportionate burden
on residential and small business customers—while failing to properly allocate the cost
responsibility to large-scale industrial users and data centers driving much of this growth.
1. Disproportionate Residential Impact
Idaho Power is proposing a 17.35%increase for residential customers—double the
percentage increase for some of the largest power users (such as Large General Service at
7.26% and Large Power contracts at 8.22%).Additionally,the proposed fixed service charge
hike from $15 to $25 will further shift the burden onto low-and fixed-income households,
regardless of their actual energy usage.
This approach penalizes energy-conscious consumers while providing a pricing cushion for
high-usage corporate entities. It effectively decouples usage from cost responsibility in a
way that disincentivizes conservation and contradicts Idaho Power's stated commitment
to efficiency and affordability.
2. Industrial Growth Driving Infrastructure Expansion
Idaho Power's own filings cite unprecedented capital investment needs to serve a"growing
customer base."However, much of this growth is not residential—it's industrial.The Meta
data center in Kuna is one example of a hyperscale facility requiring immense energy to

operate.Additionally, more data centers have already been approved or are in development
across the Treasure Valley and Magic Valley regions.
These mega-facilities contribute to massive base load demand, strain infrastructure, and
require new transmission and substation investments. It is both illogical and unjust to pass
these capital costs primarily onto Idaho households while industrial beneficiaries enjoy
relatively modest increases and, in some cases, rate incentives or special contracts.
3.Cost-Shifting Due to Renewables and Buybacks
Idaho Power continues to expand its portfolio of wind and solar energy—an important and
commendable step. However, the purchase power agreements and customer buybacks
tied to these resources must be carefully scrutinized for cost recovery mechanisms. If
these renewable investments or associated subsidies are not revenue-neutral, they further
exacerbate cross-class subsidization.
Residential ratepayers should not be used to smooth the financial pathway for commercial
users benefiting from low-carbon generation at scale. Nor should they subsidize net
metering agreements that shift grid maintenance costs disproportionately onto those
without solar systems.
4. Need for Fair Cost Allocation Based on Usage and Demand
The fundamental principle of public utility ratemaking is cost causation equals cost
responsibility.Yet Idaho Power's proposal clearly contradicts this.The companies and
industries driving demand growth—data centers, heavy industrial operations, and large
agricultural operations that rely heavily on electric-powered irrigation systems—must bear
a proportionate share of the infrastructure and energy costs they create.
Idaho's families and small businesses should not be left footing the bill for corporate
expansion, especially when some of these entities are among the most profitable
companies in the world.This proposal, as structured, erodes public trust and undermines
the fairness of the regulatory process.
Conclusion
urge the Idaho Public Utilities Commission to reject Idaho Power's proposed rate increase
as filed. Instead, direct the company to revise its rate structure to ensure:
• Fair cost allocation based on actual usage and demand drivers
• A cap or rollback of the proposed fixed residential service charge

c �
L
Increased transparency and accountability regarding industrial and data center
contributions to infrastructure strain
Protection for vulnerable households from excessive bill increases
Thankyou for your attention to this critical matter and your service to Idaho's public
interest.
Respectfully,
Denise LaFever