20250730Rebuttal Testimony.pdf

RECEIVED
July 30, 2025
IDAHO PUBLIC
UTILITIES COMMISSION
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S CASE NO. IPC-E-24-44
APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF A
SPECIAL CONTRACT AND TARIFF
SCHEDULE 28 TO PROVIDE ELECTRIC
SERVICE TO MICRON IDAHO
SEMICONDUCTOR MANUFACTURING
(TRITON) LLC
INTERVENOR
IDAHO IRRIGATION PUMPERS ASSOCIATION, INC.
REBUTTAL TESTIMONY OF
LANCE D. KAUFMAN, Ph.D.
July 29, 2025

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Micron Special Contract Application
Case No. IPC-E-24-44
Rebuttal Testimony of Lance D. Kaufman, Ph.D.
I. Introduction and Summary.............................................................................................................. I
EXHIBIT LIST
Exhibit 207—Micron Second Idaho FAB Press Release
Page i

1 I. INTRODUCTION AND ADDITIONAL FACTORS
2 Q. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND OCCUPATION.
3 A. My name is Lance D. Kaufman. I am a consultant representing utility customers before state
4 public utility commissions in the Northwest and Intermountain West. My witness qualification
5 statement can be found at Exhibit 201.
6 Q. PLEASE IDENTIFY THE PARTY ON WHOSE BEHALF YOU ARE TESTIFYING.
7 A. I am testifying on behalf of the Idaho Irrigation Pumpers Association, Inc. ("IIPA"). IIPA is a
8 non-profit trade association whose members are irrigation energy users in the Idaho, including
9 customers receiving electric services from Idaho Power Company. ("IPC" or"Company).
10 Q. WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF YOUR TESTIMONY?
11 A. I provide testimony on the cost, rate impacts, and risks associated with the proposed special
12 contract("ESA").
13 Q. WHAT FINDING DOES IPC REQUEST THE COMMISSION TO MAKE WITH
14 RESPECT TO THE SPECIAL CONTRACT?
15 A. IPC recommends that the Commission approve the pricing in the special contract"as just,
16 reasonable, and in the public interest, and find that the proposed rates are consistent with the
17 principle of no harm to existing customers."1
18 Q. DO YOU AGREE THAT THE COMMISSION SHOULD BASE ITS DECISION
19 REGARDING THIS APPLICATION ON WHETHER THE PRICING OF THE
20 CONTRACT IS IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE
21 PRINCIPAL OF NO HARM TO EXISTING CUSTOMERS?
22 A. Yes, I agree that the special contract pricing should only be approved if the pricing is just,
23 reasonable, and in the public interest, and if it is consistent with the principle of no harm.
1 Anderson Direct at 20:23 to 21:2.
Case No. IPC-E-24-44 IIPA-Kaufman, Re
07/30/2025 Page 1

I However, I disagree with IPC's assertion that prices are in the public interest and cause no
2 harm to existing customers.
3 Q. WHAT CONSTITUTES NO HARM TO EXISTING CUSTOMERS?
4 A. Existing customers are not harmed by the special contract if existing customer rates are not
5 increased as a result of the contract and existing customers don't face material increases in risk
6 due to the contract.
7 Q. HAS RECENT NEWS CHANGED THE CONTEXT OF THIS CASE?
8 A. Yes, On June 12, 2025 Micron announced a second Idaho FAB plant.2 If this second new
9 fabrication plant is of similar scale, Micron's new load could reach 1000 MW. At a 90 percent
10 load factor this amounts to 7,884 GWh per year. To put this in perspective, IPC's current Idaho
11 load is 15,451 GWh.3 If this second FAB becomes operational at a similar scale, the new load
12 would be more than half of IPC's existing load. This new load is the equivalent of 723,000
13 Idaho homes. This is a phenomenal amount of energy for a single customer and underscores
14 the importance of carefully evaluating the terms of the contract and ensuring sufficient
15 protections for existing customers.
16 Q. HAS THERE BEEN FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPOSED NEW LARGE
17 LOAD LEGISLATION?
18 A. Yes, IIPA has met with legislators and stakeholders such as industrial customer representatives
19 several times since the submission of my opening testimony. There continues to be broad
20 support for this legislation. IIPA has also presented the proposed legislation to the Idaho Farm
2 Exhibit 206.
3 Case No.IPC-E-25-16 Noe Workpaper 11 -2025 Idaho GRC TY Rev Forecast Jan-Dec.xlsx.
Case No. IPC-E-24-44 IIPA-Kaufman, Re
07/30/2025 Page 2

I Bureau and the Idaho Farm Bureau is in the process of adopting a policy that supports the
2 principles behind this legislation.
3 II. STAFFING OPENING TESTIMONY AND MY RESPONSE
4 Q. WHAT ISSUES DOES STAFF'S OPENING TESTIMONY ADDRESS?
5 A. Staff s opening testimony addresses the following issues:
6 1. Potential negative impacts of special contract on other customers;
7 2. Upfront cost of the specific infrastructure necessary to provide service to the Micron memory
8 manufacturing fabrication complex ("Micron FAB");
9 3. Pricing structure
10 4. Energy pricing
11 5. Demand pricing,
12 6. No harm analysis,
13 7. Other Special Contract terms to ensure costs are not borne by other customers; and
14 8. Power Cost Adjustment ("PCA") accounting treatment.
15 Q. WHAT IS YOUR RESPONSE ON THESE ISSUES?
16 A. I generally agree with Staff, however on some issues I offer similar but slightly different views.
17 These differing views also lead to different conclusions regarding Staffs recommendation.
18 1. I agree with Staffs overall concern that the special contract has large potential cost impacts
19 on other customers.4 There appears to be agreement between parties that the special
20 contract should be structured in a manner that minimizes this risk. However, parties present
21 differing positions on whether IPC's proposed contract and pricing models will succeed at
4 Eldred Direct at 2.
Case No. IPC-E-24-44 IIPA-Kaufman, Re
07/30/2025 Page 3

I this. Given the unity across the parties on this goal, the Commission's primary task is not
2 whether customers should be insulated from risk, but whether they are insulated from risk.
3 2. I agree with Staff that it is appropriate for Micron to bear the upfront distribution and
4 transmission costs of providing service to the Micron FAB.S However, my efforts to
5 investigate whether upfront costs have been appropriately assigned is ongoing, in part due to
6 the difficulties in accessing IPC's transmission data. It is premature to conclude that Micron
7 is in fact bearing all upfront costs. In addition, I caution that while Micron may pay up-front
8 capital costs for distribution and substation costs, there will continue to be on-going
9 operation and maintenance costs and plant replacement costs that will not be covered up
10 front by Micron and will need to be addressed in future rate cases.
11 3. I agree with Staff s general support of the contract's pricing structure, conditional on costs
12 being properly assigned and allocated.6 I disagree that all customer costs are covered by up-
13 front capital cost payments, however, as long as these costs are recovered through the
14 demand and energy charges there is no need for a specific customer charge.
15 4. Staff supports the marginal energy pricing model for energy costs, but recommends
16 allowing for changes to the marginal price model and suggests Micron's ability to switch to
17 an embedded cost rate be subject to Commission approval. Staffs approval of the energy
18 pricing model does not appear to contemplate the issues raised in my testimony regarding
19 the long-run energy cost impacts of the special contract. I agree that Staffs proposal to
20 allow changes to the price model and to require commission approval for any switch to
5 Eldred Direct at 4-5.
6 Eldred Direct at 5-9.
7 Eldred Direct at 9-11.
Case No. IPC-E-24-44 IIPA-Kaufman, Re
07/30/2025 Page 4

I embedded cost pricing add protections to other customers,but these changes do not remedy
2 the underlying problem with long run energy cost impacts of the special contract. Even with
3 Staffs proposed changes I continue to recommend that the long-run energy cost impacts be
4 considered in setting the Special Contract rates.
5 5. When discussing the demand pricing, Staff states "I recommend the Commission approve
6 the Company's proposed method for determining the Demand Charges and order the
7 Company to update the Demand Charges...."8 However, elsewhere in Staff s testimony
8 Staff states "Although I have not quantified the effect of this [load growth cost] issue, I
9 recommend that the Company isolate the effect of this dynamic when cost allocation and
10 rates need to be set for these customers in future general rate cases and develop methods to
11 ensure other customers are not harmed."9 These two recommendations appear inconsistent,
12 because the Company's method of determining demand charges presumes an embedded cost
13 allocation paradigm that Staff indicates may harm existing customers. Indeed, the analysis
14 in my opening testimony demonstrates that there is substantial harm to existing customers
15 under the Company's proposed method for determining demand charges.
16 Staff also recommends extending take or pay provisions by five years.10 This
17 recommendation adds some protections to customers related to stranded costs and
18 unrealized load growth. However, the recommendation only delays the contract risk I note
19 in my opening testimony. The financial risk that IPC will be exposed to in the event of a
20 default by Micron remains under Staff s recommendation.
8 Eldred Direct at 14.
9 Eldred Direct at 9.
10 Eldred Direct at 17.
Case No. IPC-E-24-44 IIPA-Kaufman, Re
07/30/2025 Page 5

1 6. Staff s concerns regarding IPC's no-harm analysis complement the concerns raised in my
2 Opening Testimony." The no-harm test should be a comprehensive test that explores the
3 total long-run impacts on the company's energy and transmission revenue requirement.
4 7. Staff generally finds the other contract terms to be sufficient to protect IPC and other
5 customers.12 However, Staff appears to not have contemplated the scenario I raise in
6 opening testimony, in which the termination fee is insufficient to cover more than a year of
7 lost contract revenues, leading to substantial financial distress for IPC.
8 8. I disagree with Staffs support of the proposed PCA accounting treatment. Staff concludes
9 that this treatment"prudently allocates costs for serving the Micron FAB...." However, it
10 should be remembered that the marginal cost prices are based on forecasts and not subject to
11 true-ups. This means that any deviations in forecasted costs are born by other customers,
12 even if these costs are attributable to serving the special contract load. This adds substantial
13 forecast risk to other customers. Consider the following situation.
14 Suppose that the marginal resource serving Micron is market purchases, and in the
15 model used to set marginal cost rates the market rates are forecasted to be $50 per MWh.
16 Suppose also that in the actual operating year market purchases are $60 per MWh. If Micron
17 were charged$50 per MWh,but IPC incurred $60 per MWh, IPC would experience
18 increased net power cost without corresponding increased special contract revenue of$10
19 per MWh, and these costs would be shared with rate payers. At full load, annual energy of
11 Eldred Direct at 19-21.
12 Eldred Direct at 21-23.
Case No. IPC-E-24-44 IIPA-Kaufman, Re
07/30/2025 Page 6

I Micron is estimated at 3.94 million MWh,13 a revenue shortfall of$39.4 million. This cost
2 will be paid by other customers even though it is a cost incurred to serve Micron.14
3 III. EVALUATION OF STAFF'S RECOMENDATIONS
4 Q. PLEASE SUMMARIZE YOUR EVALUATION OF STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS.
5 A. Staff makes six recommendations:
6 1. "[T]he Company isolates the effect of new special contract customers when cost allocation
7 and rates need to be set for these customers in future general rate cases, and develop
8 methods to ensure other customers are not harmed. ,15
9 a. I generally support this recommendation, however I add that it is appropriate to also
10 update initial rates consistent with my opening testimony to provide earlier price
11 signals to Micron. Otherwise Micron may not be aware of it's potential energy costs
12 until 2027 or later. At a minimum, cost allocations should be addressed in IPC's current
13 general rate case, IPC-E-25-16.
14 2. "[T]he Commission approve the proposed Special Contract contingent on my proposed
15 modifications to the contract terms related to: (1)the Marginal Cost-Based Energy Charges;
16 and(2)the Minimum Monthly Billing Demand."16
17 a. This recommendation is only appropriate if 1) long-run energy costs are fairly allocated
18 to Micron in base rates in a manner that prevents other customer's generation and
19 transmission rates from increasing, 2)the termination clause is appropriately modified
13 500 MW times 90%load factor times 8760 hours per year.
14 There is a symmetric risk in the opposite direction,in which overestimated costs benefit other customers.However,the
presence of symmetry does not negate the fact customers bear the forecast risk associated with Micron's energy
costs.
15 Eldred Direct at 24.
16 Eldred Direct at 24.
Case No. IPC-E-24-44 IIPA-Kaufman, Re
07/30/2025 Page 7

I to address default risk discussed in my opening testimony, and 3) the marginal cost
2 forecast error risk is appropriately born by Micron.
3 b. If the Commission does not address these outstanding issues, the Commission should
4 not offer any long-term approval of the contract, as the contract would conflict with the
5 intent of pending Idaho legislation. At a minimum, the Commission should provide the
6 Idaho legislature an opportunity to finalize new large load legislation prior to locking
7 existing customers into a harmful long-term contract.
8 3. "[T]he language in the Special Contract regarding the Marginal Cost-Based Energy Charges
9 explicitly: (1)Allow the ability to update the method used to determine the Energy Charges;
10 and(2) state a requirement for Commission approval and justification for moving from a
11 Marginal Cost-based Energy Charge to an Energy Charge based on an embedded rate or other
12 basis after the scheduled ramp period. The justification should show that the change in basis
13 will not shift costs to other customers."17
14 a. I support this recommendation, conditional on addressing the other issues I raise
15 regarding marginal energy pricing.
16 4. "[T]he Commission approve the Company's proposed method for determining the Marginal
17 Cost-Based Energy Charge and order the Company to update the Energy Charge included in
18 the proposed Schedule 28 tariff through a compliance filing to reflect a marginal energy rate
19 based on expectations from April 2025 through March 2026 similar to the marginal energy
20 rates approved in Case No. IPC-E-25-17."18
17 Eldred Direct at 24.
18 Eldred Direct at 24.
Case No. IPC-E-24-44 IIPA-Kaufman, Re
07/30/2025 Page 8

I a. I support this recommendation, conditional on addressing the other issues I raise
2 regarding marginal energy pricing.
3 5. "[T]he Commission approve the Company's proposed method for determining the Demand
4 Charges and order the Company to update the Demand Charges included in the proposed
5 Schedule 28 tariff through a compliance filing to reflect the aggregate Special Contract
6 percentage revenue increase authorized by the Commission in Case No. IPC-E-24-07."19
7 a. I support this recommendation if it is understood that costs are allocated in a manner
8 that ensures existing customer's generation and transmission rates do not increase as a
9 result of Micron's load. Under this understanding, the percentage increase authorized
10 by the Commission in Case No. IPC-E-24-07 is inapplicable.
11 6. "[T]he Minimum Monthly Billing Demand should not be reduced,per the schedule as
12 stipulated in Section 5.5(b) of the Special Contract,until it can be shown that the Micron FAB
13 has reached a steady state. Instead, [the] reductions in the Minimum Monthly Billing Demand
14 should be revisited 5 years after the effective date of the Embedded Contract Demand. If at
15 that time Micron can show stable loads and stability of revenue, the reductions in the Minimum
16 Monthly Billing Demand can begin at that time based on the schedule in the proposed Special
17 Contract."20
18 a. I support this recommendation, but note that it does not address the contract termination
19 risk noted in my opening testimony.
20 7. "[T]he Commission approve the PCA accounting treatment proposed in the Application. ,21
19 Eldred Direct at 25.
20 Eldred Direct at 25.
21 Eldred Direct at 25.
Case No. IPC-E-24-44 IIPA-Kaufman, Re
07/30/2025 Page 9

I a. The proposed accounting treatment shifts substantial forecast risk to other customers.
2 Q. WHAT IS YOUR PRIMARY RESPONSE TO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION?
3 A. Staff recommends approval of the Special Contract. However, Staff s recommendation leaves
4 the primary issue in this case, the allocation of incremental costs, ambiguous. This is because
5 Staff notes the shortfalls with existing cost allocation methods, but does not recommend any
6 changes to these methods. Instead, Staff delays addressing this issue for a future rate case.
7 Staffs recommendation of approval of the Special Contract should only be granted if the terms
8 of the contract are modified to be consistent with the proposed legislation in Exhibit 204,
9 House Bill 396 and Exhibit 205, Proposed Draft Legislation. Alternatively the approval of the
10 special contract should be temporary pending the resolution of these outstanding issues.
11 Q. DOES THIS CONCLUDE YOUR TESTIMONY?
12 A. Yes
Case No. IPC-E-24-44 IIPA-Kaufman, Re
07/30/2025 Page 10

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFIY that on this 30th day of July, 2025, I served a true, correct and
complete copy of the Idaho Irrigation Pumpers Association, Inc.'s Rebuttal Testimony of Lance
D. Kaufman to each of the following, via the method indicated below:
Monica Barrios-Sanchez, Commission Secretary ❑ U.S. Mail
Idaho Public Utilities Commission ❑ Hand Delivered
P.O. Box 83720 ❑ Overnight Mail
Boise, ID 83720-0074 ❑ Telecopy(Fax)
secretarygpuc.idaho.gov ® Electronic Mail (Email)
Chris Burdin ❑ U.S. Mail
Deputy Attorney General ❑ Hand Delivered
Idaho Public Utilities Commission ❑ Overnight Mail
P.O. Box 83720 ❑ Telecopy(Fax)
Boise, ID 83720-0074 ® Electronic Mail (Email)
Chris.burding]2uc.Idaho.gov
Megan Goicoechea Allen ❑ U.S. Mail
Donovan E. Walker ❑ Hand Delivered
Connie Aschenbrenner ❑ Overnight Mail
Grant Anderson ❑ Telecopy(Fax)
Idaho Power Company ® Electronic Mail (Email)
1221 W. Idaho Street (83702)
P.O. Box 70
Boise, ID 83707
mgoicoecheaallengidahopower.com
dwalker(a�idahopower.com
dockets gidahopower.com
caschenbrenner(ab,idahopower.com
gandersongidahopower.com
Lance Kaufman, Ph.D. ❑ U.S. Mail
Idaho Irrigation Pumpers Association, Inc. ❑ Hand Delivered
2623 NW Bluebell Place ❑ Overnight Mail
Corvallis, OR 97330 ❑ Telecopy(Fax)
lancegae isg insi hg t.com ® Electronic Mail (Email)
Case No. IPC-E-24-44 IIPA-Kaufman, Re
7/29/2025 Page 11

Austin Rueschhoff ❑ U.S. Mail
Thorvald A. Nelson ❑ Hand Delivered
Austin W. Jensen ❑ Overnight Mail
Kristine A.K. Roach ❑ Telecopy(Fax)
Holland& Hart, LLP ® Electronic Mail (Email)
Micron Technology, Inc.
555 17th Street Suite 3200
Denver, CO 80202
darueschhof[@hollandhart.com
tnelson(a,hollandhart.com
[e-mail]
karoach(ir hollandhart.com
[e-mail]
Industrial Customer of Idaho Power ❑ U.S. Mail
c/o Peter J. Richardson ❑ Hand Delivered
Richardson, Adams, PLLC ❑ Overnight Mail
515 N. 27th St. ❑ Telecopy(Fax)
P.O. Box 7218 ® Electronic Mail (Email)
Boise, ID 83702
[e-mail]
Dr. Don Reading ❑ U.S. Mail
280 S. Silverwood Way ❑ Hand Delivered
Eagle, ID 83616 ❑ Overnight Mail
[e-mail] ❑ Telecopy(Fax)
® Electronic Mail (Email)
Courtney White ❑ U.S. Mail
Mike Heckler ❑ Hand Delivered
Clean Energy Opportunities for Idaho ❑ Overnight Mail
3778 Plantation River Drive, Suite 102 ❑ Telecopy(Fax)
Boise, ID 83703 ® Electronic Mail (Email)
courtney(a),cleanenerg opportunities.com
[e-mail]
Case No. IPC-E-24-44 IIPA-Kaufman, Re
7/29/2025 Page 12

Kelsey Jae (ISB No. 7899) ❑ U.S. Mail
Clean Energy Opportunities for Idaho ❑ Hand Delivered
920 N. Clover Dr., Boise, ID 83703 ❑ Overnight Mail
kelsey(i&kelseyiae.com ❑ Telecopy(Fax)
® Electronic Mail (Email)
ERIC L. OLSEN
Case No. IPC-E-24-44 IIPA-Kaufman, Re
7/29/2025 Page 13

BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S CASE NO. IPC-E-24-44
APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF A
SPECIAL CONTRACT AND TARIFF
SCHEDULE 28 TO PROVIDE ELECTRIC
SERVICE TO MICRON IDAHO EXHIBIT 207
SEMICONDUCTOR MANUFACTURING
(TRITON) LLC
INTERVENOR
IDAHO IRRIGATION PUMPERS ASSOCIATION, INC.
LANCE D. KAUFMAN, Ph.D.
Exhibit 207
MICRON SECOND FABRICATION PLANT ANNOUNCEMENT

•
m icrort.
Micron and Trump Administration Announce Expanded U.S.
Investments in Leading-Edge DRAM Manufacturing and R&D
Micron Plans to Invest Approximately$200 Billion in Semiconductor Manufacturing and R&D in
Idaho, New York and Virginia, Enhancing Domestic Memory Supply and Technology Leadership
Micron to Build Second Leading-Edge Memory Manufacturing Fab in Idaho, Modernize and
Expand Virginia Fab and Bring End-to-End High Bandwidth Memory (HBM) Manufacturing
Capabilities to U.S. to Meet Anticipated AI-Driven Demand
BOISE, Idaho, June 12, 2025 — Micron Technology, Inc. (Nasdaq: MU) and the Trump
Administration today announced Micron's plans to expand its U.S. investments to approximately
$150 billion in domestic memory manufacturing and $50 billion in R&D, creating an estimated
90,000 direct and indirect jobs. As part of today's announcement, Micron plans to invest an
additional $30 billion beyond prior plans which includes building a second leading-edge memory
fab in Boise, Idaho; expanding and modernizing its existing manufacturing facility in Manassas,
Virginia; and bringing advanced packaging capabilities to the U.S. to enable long-term growth in
High Bandwidth Memory (HBM), which is essential to the Al market. Additionally, Micron is
announcing a planned $50 billion domestic R&D investment, reaffirming its long-term position as
the global memory technology leader. As previously announced, Micron's investment includes
its ongoing plans for a megafab in New York.
Micron's approximately $200 billion broader U.S. expansion vision includes two leading-edge
high-volume fabs in Idaho, up to four leading-edge high-volume fabs in New York, the
expansion and modernization of its existing manufacturing fab in Virginia, advanced HBM
packaging capabilities and R&D to drive American innovation and technology leadership. These
investments are designed to allow Micron to meet expected market demand, maintain share
and support Micron's goal of producing 40% of its DRAM in the U.S. The co-location of these
two Idaho fabs with Micron's Idaho R&D operations will drive economies of scale and faster time
to market for leading-edge products, including HBM.
Micron has already achieved key construction milestones on its first Idaho fab with DRAM
output scheduled to begin in 2027. The second Idaho fab will increase Micron's production of
DRAM in the U.S., serving growing market demand fueled by Al, while the company expects to
begin ground preparation in New York later this year following completion of state and federal
environmental review processes. Micron expects its second Idaho fab to come online before the

m i c ro ft®
first New York fab. Micron will continue to manage its supply growth consistent with market
conditions.
Following the completion of the second Idaho fab, Micron plans to bring advanced HBM
packaging capabilities to the U.S. Additionally, Micron has finalized a $275 million CHIPS Act
direct funding award supporting its investment to expand and modernize its Manassas, Virginia
facility, which will begin this year. This investment will onshore Micron's 1-alpha DRAM node,
reinforcing the company's ongoing commitment to key sectors including industrial, automotive,
defense and aerospace, and medical devices.
"Micron's U.S. memory manufacturing and R&D plans underscore our commitment to driving
innovation and strengthening the domestic semiconductor industry," said Micron Chairman,
President and CEO Sanjay Mehrotra. "This approximately $200 billion investment will reinforce
America's technological leadership, create tens of thousands of American jobs across the
semiconductor ecosystem and secure a domestic supply of semiconductors—critical to
economic and national security. We are grateful for the support from President Trump,
Secretary Lutnick and our federal, state and local partners who have been instrumental in
advancing domestic semiconductor manufacturing."
"President Trump has made it clear that the time to build in America is now," said Secretary of
Commerce Howard Lutnick. "In partnership with the Department of Commerce, Micron is
announcing a $200 billion semiconductor manufacturing and R&D investment to bring the full
spectrum of memory chip production back to the United States. Micron's planned investment will
ensure the U.S. advances its lead across critical industries like Al, automotive, and aerospace &
defense."
Micron anticipates that all of its U.S. investments will be eligible for the Advanced Manufacturing
Investment Credit (AMIC), and the company has already secured support at the local, state and
federal level. This includes up to $6.4 billion in CHIPS Act direct funding to support the
construction of two Idaho fabs and two New York fabs, as well as the expansion and
modernization of its Virginia fab. Micron applauds Rep. Tenney (R-NY) for introducing the
Building Advanced Semiconductors Investment Credit Act, which would increase AMIC to 35%
and extend it by four years. Strengthening AMIC will help ensure investment in U.S.
semiconductor manufacturing over the next four years and support long-term growth,
reestablishing America's leadership in this critical industry.

m i croft®
Satya Nadella, Chairman and CEO, Microsoft
"Strengthening semiconductor manufacturing in the U.S. will drive new innovation, create high-
skilled jobs, and further American competitiveness. We applaud Micron Technology and the
Trump Administration on this critical initiative to advance the country's leadership in this vital
industry."
Jensen Huang, Founder and CEO, NVIDIA
"Micron's investment in advanced memory manufacturing and HBM capabilities in the U.S., with
support from Trump Administration, is an important step forward for the Al ecosystem. Micron's
leadership in high-performance memory is invaluable to enabling the next generation of Al
breakthroughs that NVIDIA is driving. We're excited to collaborate with Micron as we push the
boundaries of what's possible in Al and high-performance computing."
Tim Cook, CEO, Apple
"At Apple, we're proud to work with suppliers in all 50 states — including Micron, whose
technology helps power the products our users rely on every day. This new commitment is
another great example of American manufacturing leadership, and we look forward to building
on our work together."
Michael Dell, Chairman and CEO, Dell Technologies
"Micron's commitment to expanding U.S. memory production marks a pivotal moment for the
technology industry. As a long-time strategic partner, we collaborate with Micron to develop
infrastructure solutions that power Al and general-purpose computing. This investment
strengthens the availability of secure, scalable and sustainable memory solutions critical to
driving innovation and progress across industries."
Matt Garman, CEO, AWS
"Micron's investment in expanding memory manufacturing and advanced packaging in the U.S.
is a significant milestone for the semiconductor industry. At AWS, we are building the
infrastructure that is powering the next generation of generative Al and high-performance
computing, and memory is a critical enabler of that mission. Micron's expansion further
strengthens the domestic supply chain for key semiconductor technologies as we continue to
deliver products with the performance, scale, security, sustainability, and quality that our
customers demand."

m i c ro rL®
Dr. Lisa Su, Chair and CEO, AMD
"Micron's investment to expand its U.S. presence is both timely and strategically important.
Strengthening the domestic semiconductor supply chain is critical as we accelerate innovation
in Al and high-performance computing. At AMD, we value our long-standing partnership with
Micron and their continued leadership in memory technology, which plays a vital role in enabling
our high-performance, energy-efficient computing solutions."
Cristiano Amon, President and CEO, Qualcomm Incorporated
"Micron's investment in U.S.-based memory manufacturing is a significant milestone for the
semiconductor industry. As a key technology player and longstanding partner, we value
Micron's commitment to strengthening the domestic semiconductor supply chain, which is
crucial for our supply chain resilience and diversification. This vital investment not only supports
American innovation across a wide range of industries including automotive, and beyond, but
also, ensures that critical technologies are securely and reliably available. We are proud to
support this initiative, which enables the growth and sustainability of U.S. manufacturing."
To support the growth of the U.S. semiconductor industry, Micron has committed over$325
million to develop the next-generation workforce and strengthen communities across Idaho,
New York and Virginia. This investment includes semiconductor curriculum development,
community college partnerships for apprenticeships, university partnerships and other programs
aimed at expanding access to semiconductor careers. These ongoing efforts will be critical to
building a robust talent pipeline that will support Micron's long-term and U.S. technology
leadership.
About Micron Technology, Inc.
Micron Technology, Inc. is an industry leader in innovative memory and storage solutions,
transforming how the world uses information to enrich life for all. With a relentless focus on our
customers, technology leadership, and manufacturing and operational excellence, Micron
delivers a rich portfolio of high-performance DRAM, NAND, and NOR memory and storage
products through our Micron®and Crucial®brands. Every day, the innovations that our people
create fuel the data economy, enabling advances in artificial intelligence (AI) and compute-
intensive applications that unleash opportunities —from the data center to the intelligent edge
and across the client and mobile user experience. To learn more about Micron Technology, Inc.
(Nasdaq: MU), visit micron.com.
©2025 Micron Technology, Inc.All rights reserved. Information, products, and/or specifications are subject to change
without notice. Micron, the Micron logo, and all other Micron trademarks are the property of Micron Technology, Inc.
All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.

m i c ro rL®
Forward-Looking Statements
This press release contains forward-looking statements, including statements regarding the
investments in and development of manufacturing facilities, expected tax credits and incentives,
fab opening and output timing expectations, expected market share and bit demand growth, and
job creation and community impact. These forward-looking statements are subject to a number
of risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially. Please refer to the
documents Micron files with the Securities and Exchange Commission, specifically its most
recent Form 10-K and Form 10-Q. These documents contain and identify important factors that
could cause Micron's actual results to differ materially from those contained in these forward-
looking statements. These certain factors can be found at https://investors.micron.com/risk-
factor. Although Micron believes that the expectations reflected in the forward-looking
statements are reasonable, Micron cannot guarantee future results, levels of activity,
performance, or achievements. Micron is under no duty to update any of the forward-looking
statements after the date of this press release to conform these statements to actual results.
Micron Media Relations Contact
Mark Plungy
Micron Technology, Inc.
[phone]
corpcomms(ab-micron.com
Micron Investor Relations Contact
Satya Kumar
Micron Technology, Inc.
[phone]
satyakumar(cD-micron.com