20251105Direct Jacobson.pdf

RECEIVED
NOVEMBER 5, 2025
IDAHO PUBLIC
UTILITIES COMMISSION
Preston N. Carter, ISB No. 8462
Megann E. Meier, ISB No. 11948
GIVENS PURSLEY LLP
601 West Bannock Street
P.O. Box 2720
Boise, Idaho 83701-2720
Office: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Intermountain Gas Company
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION Case No. INT-G-25-02
OF INTERMOUNTAIN GAS COMPANY
FOR THE AUTHORITY TO INCREASE
ITS RATES AND CHARGES FOR
NATURAL GAS SERVICE IN THE STATE
OF IDAHO
DIRECT TESTIMONY OF TRAVIS JACOBSON
IN SUPPORT OF STIPULATION AND SETTLEMENT
NOVEMBER 5,2025

INTRODUCTION
1 Q. Please state your name,business address,and present position with Intermountain Gas
2 Company ("Intermountain" or"Company").
3 A. My name is Travis Jacobson, and I am the Vice President of Regulatory Affairs for MDU
4 Resources Group Inc., Intermountain's parent company. My business address is 400 North
5 Fourth Street, Bismarck, ND 58501.
6 Q. Please describe your involvement in this proceeding.
7 A. I have reviewed the testimony of the Company's witnesses; I was involved in reviewing
8 and preparing information related to the extensive production requests and responses; I
9 fully participated in all the settlement conferences; and I am otherwise familiar with the
10 issues involved in the proceeding.
11 Q. What is the purpose of your testimony?
12 A. This testimony describes the Stipulation and Settlement("Settlement")that was signed by
13 parties in the case, expresses the Company's support of the Settlement, and recommends
14 that the Commission approve the Settlement without change.
15 Q. While maintaining confidentiality, please describe the process that resulted in the
16 Settlement.
17 A. After the Company filed its Application, Commission Staff("Staff') and intervenors
18 engaged in extensive discovery,which included over one-hundred and fifty production
19 requests and responses, as well as a series of meetings with Staff during which Staff and
20 the Company discussed questions and issues related to production requests, documents,
21 and other items related to the case.
PAGE 1 OF 4
T.JACOBSON,DI SETTLEMENT
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS COMPANY

I The Commission held a public workshop on August 28, which was attended by
2 Staff and a representative of the Company.
3 Towards the end of the discovery process, all parties to the case, including Staff,
4 Intermountain, the Alliance of Western Energy Consumers ("AWEC"), and Micron
5 Technology, Inc. ("Micron"), attended and participated in settlement meetings on
6 September 4, and 5, 2025. After extensive discussions—the contents of which are
7 confidential—the parties agreed to the essential terms of the Settlement. After an
8 additional virtual meeting and some additional negotiation, the parties finalized and signed,
9 and the Company filed, the Settlement on October 20.
10 Intermountain appreciates the time and effort of Staff and all parties to reach the
11 Settlement.
12 Q. Did all parties join the Settlement?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Please describe the Settlement.
15 A. The Settlement contains several components, each of which is described in the Settlement
16 itself. I would like to touch upon several of the key components.
17 Overall rate increase. The Company sought, in its Application, a margin revenue
18 increase of 22.2%. The Settlement, if approved by the Commission, would result in an
19 overall increase to revenue requirement of 10.4%, as illustrated in Exhibit 1 to the
20 Settlement.
21 Revenue Requirement. The Settlement includes a revenue requirement of$13
22 million. The components of the Revenue Requirement are set forth in paragraph 2 and
23 Exhibit 1 of the Settlement, and include: a return on equity of 9.5%,which is the same as
PAGE 2 OF 4
T.JACOBSON,DI SETTLEMENT
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS COMPANY

I the return on equity approved in the Company's most recent general rate case; a total
2 average rate base of$524,773,059, with certain values of components of rate base
3 delineated in the text and exhibits of the Settlement.
4 Cost of Service, Rate Design, and Rate Spread. The agreed upon class revenue
5 apportionment is set forth in paragraph 3 and Exhibit 2 to the Settlement. The customer
6 charge for residential customers will be increased to $11.00 for residential customers,
7 $23.00 for general service customers, and$275.00 for T4 customers. The customer charge
8 for all remaining classes will be as proposed in the Application and Testimony. The bill
9 impacts of the Settlement are set forth in Exhibit 2.
10 Billing Determinants and Other Issues. The parties agreed that the billing
11 determinants would be as proposed by the Company in its Application and Testimony.
12 Workshops. The Company and Staff agreed to hold workshops on a number of
13 topics prior to the next rate case, as set forth in paragraph 6. The Company will provide
14 notice of these workshops to all parties, and all parties can attend.
15 Tariff revisions. The parties agreed to the non-revenue-related tariff revisions
16 proposed by the Company as described in paragraph 8. Exhibits 3 and 4 to the Settlement
17 are tariffs, in clean and redline version, that show the new tariffs that will be implemented
18 if the Settlement is approved. For the sake of administrative efficiency, these tariffs include
19 revisions related to the Purchased Gas Adjustment("PGA") recently approved by the
20 Commission.
21 Q. Do you believe that the Settlement is in the public interest?
22 A. Yes. Each of the components of the Settlement were thoroughly discussed and negotiated
23 during the settlement meetings, with the participation of the parties, and reflect a variety of
PAGE 3 OF 4
T.JACOBSON,DI SETTLEMENT
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS COMPANY

I different aspects of the Company's customer base. Before the settlement meetings, the
2 parties had the opportunity to engage in, and did engage in, an extensive discovery process,
3 confirming that the settlement meetings and resulting Settlement were based on all relevant
4 information.
5 In addition, Staff and the Company provided an opportunity to listen to customer
6 concerns during the customer workshop, which was held before the settlement meetings.
7 All things considered, I believe that the Settlement reflects a reasonable
8 compromise of all parties' positions in the case. Each party had to compromise, but I
9 believe the overall result reflects a just, fair, and reasonable outcome that appropriately
10 balances the needs of the Company, its customers, and the parties.
11 For these reasons, the Company respectfully requests that the Commission approve
12 the Settlement without change.
13 Q. Does this conclude your testimony?
14 A. Yes.
PAGE 4 OF 4
T.JACOBSON,DI SETTLEMENT
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS COMPANY