20250821Comment_1.pdf

The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Stephen Fleming
Submission Time: Aug 21 2025 11:45AM
Email: ssffLeming(@hotmail.com
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 1709 N 10th St
Boise, ID 83702
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-16
Comment: "It's clear in Idaho Power's IRP documents that additional system load from the
Brisbie data center dwarfs the growth in residential load.
The Brisbie data center load is ostensibly powered by additional solar capacity, PVS1 and
PVS2. However as noted in the January 3, 2024 email from Idaho Power, there is a
mismatch between the constant load of a datacenter and the intermittent power produced
by solar power.
Idaho Power intended to use large scale battery storage to offset a portion of the Brisbie
base load in concert with PVS1 and PVS2. Case number IPC-E-24-45. This project is now
impacted by tariffs on imported batteries as noted in the case records.
In the original Brisbee application, IPC-E-21-42, Idaho Power asserts "Because Brisbie will
pay the costs associated with new renewable resources under the ESA".
However, the Brisbee ESA and associated renewal projects are not available for public
review due to confidentiality requests by Idaho Power.
The Brisbee application addressed "cost recovery mechanisms necessary to protect
existing Idaho Power customers from unreasonable cost shifting". However the application
also notes Brisbee will"be credited for the value those resources bring to Idaho Power's
system".
For this case IPC-E-25-16, Idaho Power notes large capital investments and "high load
growth". The company proposes to almost double the monthly service charge for
residential customers.
Idaho Power fails to provide to the public utilities commission detailed financial analysis
related to direct and indirect costs and expenses related to Brisbee including associated
renewable and non-renewable projects. These costs and associated revenues should be
broken out as publicly disclosed financial line items on this and subsequent rate cases
going forward. Furthermore, the costs of this financial analysis should not be assigned to
1

other rate payers. Costs must include expenses related to rebates given to Meta. The value
of excess solar generation is not well established, as the commission knows.
Idaho Power's Brisbee financial analysis should be subject to periodic independent audits
commissioned by the PUC and paid for by Idaho Power. Audits are required because public
rate payers are unable to review Brisbee related financials due to non-disclosure. It is
important the PUC, Idaho Power, and Meta recognize the value of investing in public
confidence in this era of social media. Rumors tying the rate increase to cost shifting from
data center load are already circulating:'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2