20251112Comments_14.pdf

From: PUCWeb Notification <[e-mail]>
Sent: Saturday, November 8, 2025 5:00 PM
To: secretary<secretaryPpuc.idaho.gov>
Subject: Notice: A comment was submitted to PUCWeb
The following comments were submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: ROBERT KARRELS
Submission Time: Nov 8 2025 4:44PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 8076 S. Bogus Ridge Way
Boise, ID 83716
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-16
Comment: "Want to say I am not happy with all the current rate increases the past 2 years.
Going from a $5 Idaho Power service fee, to $10, and then to $15 this past January is
ridiculous. That's a 200% increase in 2 years on service fee. Still waiting to see something
on what the new Idaho Power rate change is to buy excess power from individuals.The last I
saw it was. changing to .009 cents per KW/hr, a ridiculous rate.Then Idaho Power sells our
power for .09 cents per KW/hr, making 10 times the value when Idaho Power has no upkeep
to pay for on personal household solar systems that supply them the power to sell. I can
see 50%gain by Idaho Power at most would be fair. Rates and changes need to be more
accessible to obtain to Idahoans. Whenever we call Idaho Power the people that answer
the phone have zero information for any questions asked. If this is a public utility company,
then all rates and rate changes in the works need to be public knowledge easily obtainable
to all users, period. "
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name: Judy Karrels
Submission Time: Nov 8 2025 4:56PM
Email: bjkarrelsPoutlook.com
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 8076 S. Bogus Ridge Way
Boise, ID 83716
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-16
Comment: "I am extremely concerned about the proposed reduced reimbursement rates.
We installed rooftop solar for the energy stability as well as a way to make an
environmental impact by using clean energy.We invested heavily in rooftop solar and feel
that this change would imact us drastically.The change from net metering to net billing
1

increased our breakeven point by many years. And these changes would make the
investment virtually worthless.
With the 31% reduction in reimbursement, we lose all cost benefits for installing solar.
With these changes, why would anyone ever invest in clean rooftop solar energy in the
future?
Idaho Power is a monopoly, and we rely on the PUC to protect us from predatory practices.
After tripling their service charge between December of 2023 and January of 2025, Idaho
Power is experiencing incredible profits at the expense of the consumer."
Please do not approve this proposed rate change.
Thankyou.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following comments were submitted via PUCWeb:
Name:Thomas Buchta
Submission Time: Nov 11 2025 7:13AM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 3798 West Deerpath Drive
boise, ID 83714
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-16
Comment: "Lets focus on facts. There are two costs that IP legitimately has to recover in
delivering electricity, generation and delivery.
IP's generation comes from all over Idaho and the western US (1/3 from out of state) and is
composed of renewable and non-renewable (natural gas) sources. In public interviews IP
uses the figure of 2 cents as the cost of that generation.That generated power has to be
delivered to all of its customers via 10s of thousands of miles of lines, poles, towers,
transformers and hundreds of substations. That delivery system has to be planned for,
built, monitored, maintained and replaced. If IP charges you 12 cents per kilowatt and pays
2 cents for generation that means most of the cost of your electricity.
Now here's the easy part. Rooftop solar is delivered to neighbors on a local grid at
practically no cost to IP. They live right next door, so virtually no use of 10s of thousands of
miles of lines, poles, towers, transformers and hundreds of substations and their
management. So the question before the PUC is how much of this delivery cost savings (10
cents or 80% of the cost) should go to the rooftop solar neighbor in addition to the 2 cents
2

for generation vs IP? For an detailed independent alternative to IP's valuation of rooftop I
support the findings of the "Independent Review of the Idaho Power Value of Distributed
Energy Resources Study" by Crossroads Energy. "
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name: Julie Edwards
Submission Time: Nov 11 2025 7:55AM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 1310 E Mary Ln
Meridian, ID 83642
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-16
Comment: "I am against the huge increase in Idaho Power rates as a residential
homeowner. That amount is something that needs to happen over time to allow family
budgets to evolve in order to accommodate an increase like that. Also, if the reason behind
it is data center construction, then those need to foot part of the bill, not have residents
pay their way. "
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:Jeff Pierson <[e-mail]>
Sent:Tuesday, November 11, 2025 8:48 AM
To: secretary<[e-mail]>
Subject: IPC-E-25-16
Public Comment on Idaho Power 2025 General Rate Case
Case No. IPC-E-25-16
Submitted by: Jeff Pierson, Jerome Idaho
Date: 11/11/2025
The company's filings describe its increase as necessary for reliability, wildfire mitigation,
and "grid modernization."Yet its financial reports show a firm enjoying strong returns,
steady growth, and a dividend structure that outpaces inflation. To the public, this looks
Like profiteering under monopoly protection. The numbers may be lawful under PUC
formulas, but they are not defensible in conscience.
A regulated monopoly should exist to serve the public at the lowest reasonable cost. It
should not act as a private investment vehicle that shields shareholders from risk while
transferring every new cost to ratepayers.That is precisely what Idaho Power is attempting
to do.
The Core Asymmetry
Idaho families cannot raise their incomes by double digits whenever expenses rise. Idaho
Power can. Its profits are secured by state authority, while its customers bear the risk of
inflation, resource costs, and corporate mismanagement. This imbalance is not simply
economic. It is ethical. A company that enjoys government protection from competition
owes an equal duty of restraint.
3

IDACORP's profit reports seem to demonstrate that this duty has been forgotten.. The
company's message is clear: profitability comes first, and the public will pay whatever is
required to preserve it. A monopoly allowed to profit at record levels while raising rates on
the people who cannot choose another supplier is no longer a public servant. It is a private
extractor wearing the mask of regulation.
Political Influence and Ethical Conflict
No rate case can be judged in isolation from the political environment that enables it. Idaho
Power and its affiliates have a long history of direct and indirect political contributions
through IDACORP, employee PACs, and donations to industry associations that fund
election campaigns and lobbying. These contributions create a perception, and perhaps a
reality, of regulatory capture.
When a monopoly donates to the campaigns of the same elected officials who appoint or
influence members of the Public Utilities Commission, the integrity of the entire regulatory
process is compromised. Even if such contributions are legal, they are not ethical. They
convert public necessity into private leverage. The public is forced to wonder whether
decisions are guided by the merits of the case or by the quiet influence of campaign
dollars.
If Idaho Power truly wishes to restore public trust, it should immediately disclose all
political and lobbying contributions made directly or indirectly by itself, by IDACORP, by any
PAC controlled by its officers or employees, and by any trade associations in which it holds
membership. Every dollar spent to influence political outcomes undermines the
company's claim to act in the public interest.
Questions That Must Be Asked
1. Return on Equity
o Why is Idaho Power requesting a 10.40 percent return on equity when
comparable utilities in similar markets are earning less?
o What is Idaho Power's actual earned return for its Idaho jurisdiction over the
Last four quarters?
o How much of the requested increase depends solely on the higher equity
return and the 51 percent equity ratio?
2. Profit Translation
o How much of IDACORP's consolidated profit originates from regulated Idaho
operations?
o Has Idaho Power used excess profits to increase dividends, fund executive
bonuses, or contribute to political campaigns during the same period it
claims financial pressure?
3. Regulatory Lag Mechanisms
o What specific tools are requested to mitigate"regulatory lag,"and how do
they transfer financial risk from shareholders to customers?
o Does Idaho Power seek authority for automatic rate adjustments before full
prudence review?
4. Capital Additions and Necessity
o Provide a project-by-project breakdown of all capital additions over five
million dollars included in this request.
4

o Which of these projects are strictly required for reliability within Idaho, and
which serve regional transmission or export purposes not yet benefiting
Idaho consumers?
5. Wildfire Mitigation Costs
o What measurable safety or reliability benefits justify the proposed wildfire
spending?
o How are these costs being accounted for, and are they earning return before
benefits are demonstrated?
6. Tax Credits and Public Benefit
o Are federal tax credits and accelerated depreciation benefits being fully
passed to ratepayers?
o Are any credits being retained at the holding company or affiliate level?
7. Fixed Charge Shifts
o How much of the increase is being recovered through fixed customer charges
rather than energy usage rates?
o How will this structure impact low-income or energy-efficient households?
8. Political Contributions and Ethics
o Provide a complete accounting of all political, lobbying, and trade-
association spending over the last five years.
o How does Idaho Power justify such spending while claiming it cannot
maintain service without large rate hikes?
o Will the company commit to suspending all political contributions while any
rate increase request is pending?
Likely Weak Points in the Company's Case
Return on Equity and Equity Ratio:
A 10.40 percent ROE and a 51 percent equity capital structure are excessive given the
company's stability and credit standing. This component alone accounts for tens of
millions in annual revenue burden. The justification for above-average returns is weak.
Regulatory Lag Mechanisms:
These provisions pre-approve cost recovery before results are known, eroding consumer
protection. They effectively guarantee profits regardless of performance and remove
accountability from future investments.
Wildfire and Resiliency Spending:
The filings reference large spending categories without measurable benchmarks. Until the
company can prove quantifiable reductions in risk or outages, these programs appear to be
unbounded spending pools.
Capital Additions:
Many"grid investment" projects are listed in aggregate. Without specific cost-benefit data
and demonstrated necessity, they cannot be assumed prudent. Customers should not
finance speculative or growth-driven infrastructure.
Tax and Subsidy Transparency:
The company benefits from substantial federal incentives that must offset customer costs.
Any retention of these benefits at the corporate level constitutes a hidden markup on
public subsidies.
5

Political Expenditures:
Every dollar spent on campaign influence undermines the credibility of Idaho Power's
claim of financial need. Ratepayer dollars should not fund lobbying or electoral pressure.
The Commission should require a full accounting of these expenditures and consider them
grounds for disallowance in rate recovery.
In Closing
A regulated monopoly should be a steward, not a speculator. Idaho Power's request for
higher rates, when paired with record profits, lavish dividends, and active political
spending, shows a company that has lost its sense of moral proportion. The question
before the Commission is not only whether this rate increase is technically justified. The
deeper question is whether Idaho's regulatory framework still serves the public or merely
preserves the profits of a state-protected monopoly.
The people of Idaho deserve better. They deserve transparency, restraint, and respect from
the company that provides their most essential service. Until Idaho Power can demonstrate
that its profits, political activities, and rate requests align with the public good, this
increase should be denied or sharply reduced.
Jeff Pierson
713 East Avenue C
Jerome, ID 83338
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Catherine Galdos
Submission Time: Nov 11 2025 9:23AM
Email: cgaLdosl020C�gmaiL.com
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 4396 W Castlebar Ct.
Boise, ID 83703
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-16
Comment: "Though reduced from its previous ridiculous and exorbitant level, the proposed
general rate increase is an unfair and onerous burden for existing residential customers.
Development and business must pay for themselves, including new infrastructure and its
maintenance. Existing residential customers derive no benefit from these increases, thus,
should not be expected to pay for them beyond what we've already been assessed. It is
unconscionable to expect seniors on fixed incomes to fund commercial and/or residential
expansion. "
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6

The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Katie virden
Submission Time: Nov 11 2025 10:43AM
Email: kaliefaulkner@gmaiLcom
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 2326 perrualt
boise , ID 83716
Name of Utility Company: IDAHO POWER COMPANY
Case ID: IPC-E-25-16
Comment: "POWER IS WANTING TO INCREASING POWER BILLS AND THAT IS CRAZZY--
PEOPLE ARE TO ABLE TO MAKE END MEET AND THIS IS GOING TO PUT A HEART SHIP ON
TO THE PEOPLE --THAT IS CRAZY!!!!!"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: LEZLIE CARRIZOZA
Submission Time: Nov 11 2025 10:50AM
Email: MIA.ALEJANDRA3219C«-OICLOUD.COM
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 4016
CALDWEL, ID 83607
Name of Utility Company: IDAHO POWER
Case ID: IPC-E-25-26
Comment: "THIS RATE INCREASE RIDICULOUS. "
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Robbie Leatham
Submission Time: Nov 11 2025 2:34PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 1726 S. Broxon Street
Boise, ID 83705
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-16
Comment: "Idaho Power's proposed "reduced" rate hike will primarily extract from
individual households, adding to burgeoning costs in the Treasure Valley. Although the
7

State legislature has abetted corporate irresponsibility to our communities, it does not
absolve them from paying for their exorbitant use of power. Water rates have increased,
housing costs, food and the prices of other goods are crushing local consumers.
As a native-born Boisean and lifelong resident, I strongly encourage you to restrain Idaho
Power's residential rate hike below the current proposed amount."
Thanks for considering my perspective.
Ms. Robbie Leatham
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Cheryl Mendiola
Submission Time: Nov 12 2025 12:10AM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 1614 N. 9th St.
Boise, ID 83702
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-16
Comment: "I do not approve yet another rate increase by Idaho Power while I realize rates
go up and down wages do not go up. #DATA centers need to pay for everything on their own
infrastructure electricity. It has nothing to do with me and you. They're the ones making all
the money they need to cough up and pay thank you for your time.
I believe if there's ever any increase in utilities, wages should be increased accordingly so if
they(or any other utility)want a 9% increase minimum wage should go up 9%"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Cec EsMe <[e-mail]>
Sent:Wednesday, November 12, 2025 11:24 AM
To: secretary<[e-mail]>
Subject: No increase
No to another increase on my power bill, I cannot afford another increase, I'm a senior
citizen on social security and I CANNOT afford another increase.
Cecilia Menchaca
78 N Pleasant Hill Dr Nampa, ID 8365
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8

From: Darlene Peterson <[e-mail]>
Sent:Wednesday, November 12, 2025 12:20 PM
To: secretary<[e-mail]>
Subject: Idaho Power rate increase
I am opposed to yet another rate increase from Idaho Power. As a retired, life long resident
of Idaho, I just cannot afford to live here with all the high costs of everything right now.
I don't know how they justify another increase. I don't think it's the service as I've recently
experienced 3 power outages during calm weather. No explanation about why.
Please consider those of us who helped build this state and did not move here with a
history of higher income and therefore a larger retirement fund.
Case Number IPC-E-25-16.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Kristin Asker
Submission Time: Nov 12 2025 12:02PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 6254 N Glencrest Ave
Boise, ID 83714-2433
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-16
Comment: "Times are hard right now for a lot of people, my family included. I'm a full time
caregiver for my adult disabled son, and because of that we rely only on my husband's
salary. Another rate increase on top of all of the increases elsewhere, is going to make us
have to choose between a warm home for the winter or groceries in that home. From what
I've heard, the same is true for many others.
Idaho Power is asking for another rate hike because of increased demand, and while I know
the valley's population has grown substantially, I also understand that a large percentage of
that increased demand is or will be coming from the spread of Al data centers in the area. I
would ask that those companies, and other large corporations, that use the most energy,
be required to pay a higher increased rate to make up the difference, instead of spreading
the cost out amongst residential customers. "
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9

le
Zaf/��y f,
7-9
' nC
�71
f a >' /4ur►c�fo
a — x-
J-r- //�
LL3 � ..c
I Co-
LU c-%j
d.0 i
® -1_I
--
c'ti
C",j _