20251118Direct Donn English .pdf

RECEIVED
November 18, 2025
IDAHO PUBLIC
BEFORE THE UTILITIES COMMISSION
IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF IDAHO POWER )
COMPANY'S APPLICATION FOR ) CASE NO. IPC-E-25-16
AUTHORITY TO INCREASE ITS )
RATES AND CHARGES FOR )
ELECTRIC SERVICE IN THE STATE )
OF IDAHO )
DIRECT TESTIMONY OF DONN ENGLISH
IN SUPPORT OF THE STIPULATION
AND SETTLEMENT
IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 18, 2025

I Q. Please state your name and business address .
2 A. My name is Donn English. My business address is
3 11331 W. Chinden Blvd. , BLDG 8, STE 201-A, Boise, Idaho
4 83714 .
5 Q. By whom are you employed and in what capacity?
6 A. I am employed by the Idaho Public Utilities
7 Commission ("Commission") as the Deputy Division
8 Administrator overseeing the Utilities Division.
9 Q. Please describe your educational background and
10 professional experience .
11 A. I was hired by the Commission in 2003 and I have
12 provided testimony in numerous proceedings . My educational
13 background and professional experience are provided in more
14 detail in Exhibit No . 101 .
15 Q. What is the purpose of your testimony in this
16 proceeding?
17 A. The purpose of my testimony is to describe the
18 Application filed by Idaho Power Company ("Idaho Power" or
19 "Company") to increase its rates and charges for electric
20 service in Idaho and to implement certain measures to
21 mitigate the impact of regulatory lag, describe the
22 proposed comprehensive Stipulation and Settlement
23 ("Settlement") as it pertains to the stipulated revenue
24 requirement; and explain Staff' s support for the
25 settlement . Staff Witness Mike Louis, Engineering Program
CASE NO. IPC-E-25-16 ENGLISH, D. (Stip) 1
11/18/25 STAFF

1 Manager, provides testimony in support of the stipulated
2 rate spread and the rationale behind the forthcoming cost
3 of service case docket as called for in the proposed
4 Settlement . Staff Witness Matt Seuss, Engineer, provides
5 testimony detailing the impact of new large load customers
6 on the stipulated revenue requirement .
7 Q. How is your testimony organized?
8 A. My testimony is subdivided under the following
9 headings :
10 Background Page 2
11 Staff Investigation Page 5
12 Settlement Evaluation Page 6
13 Settlement Overview Page 8
14 Background
15 Q. Please describe Idaho Power' s original filing.
16 A. Idaho Power filed its Application to increase
17 rates and charges for electric service in Idaho on May 30,
18 2025 . The Company requested authority to increase its
19 electric base revenue in Idaho by $199 . 1 million, or
20 13 . 090, with an anticipated effective date of January 1,
21 2026 . The Company' s requested increases were based on a
22 test period ending December 31, 2025, consisting of pro
23 forma adjustments through 2025 . Recovery of forecasted
24 capital additions through December 31, 2025, were included
25 in the Company' s proposed revenue requirement and
CASE NO. IPC-E-25-16 ENGLISH, D. (Stip) 2
11/18/25 STAFF

1 calculated on an End-of-Period ("EOP") basis .
2 The Company proposed a capital structure
3 comprised of 51% equity and 49% debt, with a 10 . 4% return
4 on equity ("ROE") for an overall rate of return of 7 . 820 .
5 Additionally, the Company requested to increase
6 its monthly Service Charges . For residential customers,
7 the Company proposed to increase its Service Charge from
8 $15 . 00 per month to $25 . 00 per month for all residential
9 schedules . For Small General Service customers receiving
10 service under Schedules 7 and 8, the Company proposed to
11 increase the Service Charge from $25 . 00 per month to $30 . 00
12 per month. The Service Charge and/or Demand Charge
13 proposed for the other customer classes are detailed in
14 Exhibit No . 44 sponsored by Company Witness Grant Anderson.
15 For Schedule 1, standard residential service,
16 which includes seasonal inclining block Energy Charges, the
17 Company proposed to reduce the differentials between the
18 current tiered prices, but it did not propose to eliminate
19 tiered pricing entirely. The Company also proposed to
20 implement a bill protection program for residential
21 customers who begin taking service under Schedule 5,
22 residential time-of-use ("TOU") pricing option, effective
23 January 1, 2026 . The purpose of bill protection is to
24 reduce the financial uncertainty for customers
25 transitioning from Schedule 1 to Schedule 5 to encourage
CASE NO. IPC-E-25-16 ENGLISH, D. (Stip) 3
11/18/25 STAFF

1 participation in the optional TOU pricing by ensuring
2 customers will not pay more than $10 above what they would
3 have paid under Schedule 1 for their first 12 months of
4 service on Schedule 5 .
5 Finally, the Company proposed to implement a
6 depreciation and interest expense tracking mechanism, and
7 to designate additional accumulated deferred investment tax
8 credits ("ADITC") as eligible for accelerated amortization
9 under the terms of the currently approved ADITC/Revenue
10 Sharing Mechanism, with the addition of a $75 million
11 annual amortization cap.
12 Q. How was this case processed after the Company' s
13 Application was received?
14 A. The Commission issued a combined Notice of
15 Application, Notice of Intervention Deadline, and Notice of
16 Suspension of Proposed Effective Date ("Notice") on June
17 13, 2025, establishing an Intervention Deadline of July 5,
18 2025 . Intervenor status was subsequently granted to the
19 City of Boise City ("Boise City") ; Clean Energy
20 Opportunities for Idaho ("CEO") ; the Federal Executive
21 Agencies ("FEA") ; John Gannon, Deborah Fease, Amy Lorrance,
22 and Rany Morris ("Gannon, et al . ") ; Idaho Irrigation
23 Pumpers Association, Inc. ("IIPA") ; IdaHydro; the
24 Industrial Customers of Idaho Power ("ICIP") ; The Kroger
25 Co . ("Kroger") ; Micron Technology, Inc. ("Micron") ; and the
CASE NO. IPC-E-25-16 ENGLISH, D. (Stip) 4
11/18/25 STAFF

1 Northwest Energy Coalition ("NWEC") . These entities are
2 collectively referred to as the "Parties . " Settlement
3 negotiations were held on September 9, September 29, and
4 October 6, 2025 . All Parties were given an opportunity,
5 whether in person or virtually, to participate in or be
6 apprised of the settlement discussions .
7 Staff Investigation
8 Q. What type of investigation did Staff conduct to
9 evaluate the Company' s base rate increase request?
10 A. Staff' s approach in any general rate case ("GRC")
11 is to extensively review the Company' s Application and
12 associated testimony and workpapers, identify adjustments
13 to the proposed revenue requirement, evaluate the Company' s
14 class cost of service studies and rate spread, and prepare
15 to file testimony for a fully-litigated proceeding. There
16 were 11 Staff members analyzing this case consisting of
17 auditors, engineers, utility analysts, and consumer
18 compliance investigators . Additionally, five supervisors
19 reviewed the results of all analysis and provided policy
20 direction to the assigned Staff.
21 Staff reviewed the Company' s historical results
22 of operations, pro forma capital budgets, capital spending
23 trends, operations and maintenance ("O&M") expenses and
24 trends, and verified all the Company' s calculations and
25 assumptions regarding the overall revenue requirement, cost
CASE NO. IPC-E-25-16 ENGLISH, D. (Stip) 5
11/18/25 STAFF

1 of service, and rate design. The auditors reviewed
2 thousands of transactions, selected samples, and performed
3 transactional testing in accordance with standard audit
4 procedures . The auditors also reviewed the Company' s labor
5 expense, incentive plans, and employe benefits to ensure
6 the appropriate level of expenditures are included in
7 rates .
8 Staff reviewed both completed and proposed
9 capital investments to determine the prudency of capital
10 additions . Expenditures including pension expense,
11 salaries, and 0&M expenses were also examined, along with
12 depreciation expense and taxes . Additionally, Staff
13 investigated the Company' s cost of capital, capital
14 structure, cost of service, and revenue normalization. In
15 total, Staff propounded over 216 production requests, many
16 of which contained multiple sub-parts . Staff performed an
17 audit of the Company' s books, met with Company personnel to
18 review the underlying accounting data and capital project
19 documentation, and conducted on-site visits of certain
20 transmission, distribution, battery security, and
21 communication projects . Staff also participated in several
22 virtual meetings with Company personnel as a part of its
23 comprehensive investigation.
24 Settlement Evaluation
25 Q. How did Staff determine that the overall
CASE NO. IPC-E-25-16 ENGLISH, D. (Stip) 6
11/18/25 STAFF

1 Settlement was reasonable?
2 A. In every settlement evaluation, Staff and other
3 parties must examine the risks of losing positions at
4 hearing and determine if the settlement is a better overall
5 outcome . Staff must evaluate each individual adjustment
6 and determine the likelihood of the Commission accepting or
7 rejecting Staff' s rationale for the adjustment . All
8 parties must weigh the risks of the Commission decision
9 establishing perceived adverse precedent which creates a
10 willingness to negotiate a positive outcome in good faith.
11 Ultimately, Staff' s intent in every settlement conference
12 is to negotiate the best possible outcome for customers .
13 Q. Does Staff support the Settlement as fair, just,
14 and reasonable?
15 A. Yes, after a comprehensive review of the
16 Company' s Application, a thorough audit of the Company' s
17 books and records, an analysis of the Company' s class cost
18 of service study, and extensive negotiations with the
19 parties to the case, Staff supports the proposed
20 Settlement . The Settlement offers a reasonable balance
21 between the Company' s opportunity to earn a reasonable
22 return on its investment and affordable rates for
23 customers . Staff believes the Settlement is in the public
24 interest; is fair, just, and reasonable; and should be
25 approved by the Commission .
CASE NO. IPC-E-25-16 ENGLISH, D. (Stip) 7
11/18/25 STAFF

I Settlement Overview
2 Q. Would you please describe the terms of the
3 proposed Settlement as it related to the stipulated revenue
4 requirement?
5 A. If approved, the proposed Settlement provides a
6 reduction in the Company' s requested revenue requirement .
7 Instead of the Company' s proposed electric base rate
8 increase of $199 . 1 million (13 . 090) , electric base rates
9 for Idaho customers under the proposed Settlement will
10 increase by approximately $110 million, or 7 . 480, effective
11 January 1, 2026 .
12 Q. How was the stipulated revenue requirement
13 derived?
14 A. The stipulated revenue requirement was calculated
15 by starting with the Company' s requested revenue
16 requirement increase and subtracting the agreed upon
17 adjustments proposed by Staff and the other Parties . While
18 not all proposed adjustments were accepted by the Company,
19 concessions were made by each of the Parties to arrive at a
20 final revenue increase that was deemed acceptable to all
21 signing Parties . The calculation of the stipulated revenue
22 requirement is shown in the table on Page 5 of the signed
23 Stipulation and Settlement .
24 Q. Please explain the cost of capital and return on
25 equity components of the Settlement .
CASE NO. IPC-E-25-16 ENGLISH, D. (Stip) 8
11/18/25 STAFF

1 A. In its Application, Idaho Power proposed a 510
2 common equity ratio and a 10 . 4% ROE . The proposed
3 Settlement maintains the Company' s proposed capital
4 structure and maintains the currently authorized 9 . 6% ROE .
5 A 9 . 6% ROE reduces the Company' s requested revenue
6 requirement by approximately $27 . 7 million.
7 Q. How does the Settlement account for the Company' s
8 capital investments included in net rate base?
9 A. In its Application, the Company proposed to
10 include forecasted capital investments through December 31,
11 2025, in its calculation of net rate base . The proposed
12 Settlement is based on an authorized Idaho jurisdictional
13 rate base of $4, 881, 563, 721, which reduces the Company' s
14 proposed revenue requirement by approximately $21 . 6
15 million. The stipulated rate base amount is calculated
16 based on 2025 average of monthly averages ("AMA") utilizing
17 actual plant additions through July 31, 2025, and updated
18 forecasted capital from August 1, 2025, through December
19 31, 2025 . The signing Parties agree that, except as
20 otherwise noted in the Settlement, all capital additions
21 placed in service prior to July 31, 2025, are presumed to
22 be prudently incurred. To the extent that the Parties
23 identify potential prudence concerns with capital
24 investments after July 2025, the Parties reserve the right
25 to address those concerns in the Company' s next GRC.
CASE NO. IPC-E-25-16 ENGLISH, D. (Stip) 9
11/18/25 STAFF

1 Q. Were there additional adjustments to the
2 Company' s rate base included in the proposed Settlement?
3 A. Yes, the proposed Settlement reduces the filed
4 revenue requirement by approximately $1 . 4 million to
5 reflect higher actual customer advance balances as of July
6 2025 compared to the forecasted balances included in the
7 Company' s original filing. Additionally, the proposed
8 Settlement reduces the Company' s request by another
9 $967, 816 to include the Boardman to Hemingway seller' s
10 security deposit received from the Bonneville Power
11 Administration, which serves as an offset to plant-in-
12 service .
13 Q. Please describe the Settlement' s terms related to
14 the Company' s revenue forecast .
15 A. The proposed Settlement reduces the Company' s
16 filed request by approximately $9 . 1 million to reflect an
17 update to the revenue forecast based on actual revenue
18 through July 2025 .
19 Q. Please describe the Settlement' s terms related to
20 the Company' s operating expenses .
21 A. In total, the proposed Settlement reduces the
22 Company' s revenue requirement by nearly $6 . 5 million for
23 operating expenses . Adjustments were made to the Company' s
24 filed request for certain executive compensation, training,
25 and travel expenses ($3 . 9 million) ; Board of Director' s
CASE NO. IPC-E-25-16 ENGLISH, D. (Stip) 10
11/18/25 STAFF

1 compensation and Board of Director' s expenses ($1 . 3
2 million) ; and miscellaneous expenses ($1 .2 million) such as
3 corporate jet flights and maintenance, advertising, legal
4 fees, and injuries and damages .
5 Q. Please describe the Settlement' s terms related to
6 Wildfire Operations & Maintenance ("O&M") expense and the
7 Wildfire 0&M deferral mechanism.
8 A. The proposed Settlement removes from the
9 Company' s filed revenue requirement one-time wildfire 0&M
10 expenditures that will not continue in the future, which
11 reduces the Company' s request by $211, 884 . The proposed
12 Settlement also reduces the Company' s requested revenue
13 requirement by $736, 780 for expenses associated with the
14 Company' s standby helicopter service and the aerial drone
15 inspection pilot program. Additionally, the filed request
16 was reduced by approximately $9 . 8 million to maintain the
17 Company' s 3-year vegetation management cycle based on 2024
18 actual expenditures . The net effect of these adjustments
19 decreases the overall revenue requirement by approximately
20 $10 . 7 million.
21 A Wildfire 0&M Base of $33, 418, 421 (total system)
22 was established in the proposed Settlement . This reduced
23 base provides for a decrease of $10 . 7 million in the
24 Company' s filed request . Any prudently incurred incremental
25 expenses above the Wildfire 0&M Base for (1) vegetation
CASE NO. IPC-E-25-16 ENGLISH, D. (Stip) 11
11/18/25 STAFF

1 management, (2) Enhanced Practices for Red and Yellow Risk
2 Zones, (3) Internal Vegetation Management Crew Pilot, and
3 (4) The Standby Helicopter Service and Aerial Drone
4 Inspection Pilot are eligible for deferral through the
5 earlier of Idaho Power' s next GRC or 2027 .
6 The current wildfire deferral balance as of June
7 30, 2025, will be amortized over a 7-year period, which
8 reduces revenue requirement by approximately $2 . 6 million.
9 Q. Please describe the proposed Settlement' s terms
10 related to the Insurance Base .
11 A. The signing Parties agree to reduce the Company' s
12 requested revenue requirement by approximately $5 . 3 million
13 to reflect insurance actuals for 2024 compared to 2025
14 forecasted amount included in the Company' s filing.
15 Incremental insurance expense above the 2024 actual amount
16 of $20, 164, 472 (total system) will continue to be deferred
17 through the earlier of the Company' s next GRC or 2027 .
18 Q. Please describe the proposed Settlement as it
19 relates to the Company' s Net Power Supply Expenses
20 ("NPSE") .
21 A. Two adjustments were made to the Company' s NPSE
22 in the proposed Settlement which reduce the Company' s
23 requested revenue requirement by approximately $3 .2
24 million. The first adjustment updates the modeling
25 assumption related to natural gas prices and reduces filed
CASE NO. IPC-E-25-16 ENGLISH, D. (Stip) 12
11/18/25 STAFF

1 system NPSE by $45 .2 million. Net of the Power Cost
2 Adjustment ("PCA") transfer adjustment, this results in a
3 net reduction of $2, 186, 414 to the Company' s revenue
4 requirement .
5 The second NPSE adjustment incorporates an
6 estimate of the Energy Imbalance Market ("EIM") benefits
7 which reduces filed system NPSE by $20 . 6 million. Net of
8 the PCA transfer adjustment, this results in a net
9 reduction of $995, 491 to the Company' s revenue requirement .
10 Q. What is the impact of all revenue requirement
11 adjustments included in the proposed Settlement .
12 A. The stipulated revenue requirement increase
13 included the proposed Settlement is $110, 040, 145, which is
14 approximately $89 . 1 million less than the original filing.
15 The signing Parties agree that the $110 million net revenue
16 increase should be recovered by implementing tariffs in
17 conformance with Exhibit No . 1 to the Settlement and
18 Stipulation. Staff witness Louis provides greater detail
19 and justification for the revenue allocation in his
20 testimony.
21 Q. Are there additional elements to the proposed
22 Settlement that you would like to explain?
23 A. Yes . The Company has a revenue sharing mechanism
24 approved by the Commission in Order No . 30978 (Case No .
25 IPC-E-09-30) and modified in subsequent orders (Order Nos .
CASE NO. IPC-E-25-16 ENGLISH, D. (Stip) 13
11/18/25 STAFF

1 33149, 34071, and 36042) that includes provisions for the
2 accelerated amortization of Accumulated Deferred Investment
3 Tax Credits ("'ADITC") to help Idaho Power achieve a minimum
4 9 . 12% Idaho jurisdictional ROE . When Idaho Power earns
5 greater than a 9 . 6% Idaho jurisdictional ROE, excess
6 earnings are shared with customers . Under the proposed
7 Settlement, the maximum allowed amount of annual
8 accelerated amortization of ADITC will be $55 million for
9 calendar year 2026 and thereafter.
10 The proposed Settlement also calls for numerous
11 workshops to explore unresolved issues brought up in the
12 settlement negotiations and calls for a separate single
13 issue Class Cost of Service ("CCOS") docket to address the
14 Parties' concerns and associated policy issues . Staff
15 witnesses Louis and Seuss discuss the CCOS docket in
16 greater detail in their testimony.
17 Q. The Company' s Application included a depreciation
18 and interest tracking mechanism. How does the proposed
19 Settlement address the Company' s request for the new
20 mechanism.
21 A. While Staff was supportive of exploring the
22 possibility of a capital tracking mechanism, Staff did not
23 agree with the Company' s proposal as filed. Staff could
24 have supported some type of mechanism with a finite
25 expiration, provided that the Company agreed to not file an
CASE NO. IPC-E-25-16 ENGLISH, D. (Stip) 14
11/18/25 STAFF

1 application to increase base rates for a specified period
2 of time . Ultimately, with the Parties' concerns
3 surrounding the Company' s CCOS methodology and other
4 unresolved issues, the Parties did not want to delay the
5 Company' s next GRC.
6 Q. Do you have any other comments on the proposed
7 Settlement?
8 A. Yes . Staff believes that the proposed Settlement
9 provides the Company with necessary rate relief during a
10 time of increased capital spending and uncertain
11 inflationary pressures . The $89 . 1 million reduction to the
12 Company' s filed request is significant and is the result of
13 give and take compromises by all the Parties . The rate
14 relief provides a balance between affordable rates for
15 customers while also maintaining the financial viability of
16 the Company. The reduced revenue requirement along with
17 identified paths to resolve outstanding issues creates a
18 Settlement that represents a fair, just, and reasonable
19 compromise of the positions put forth by the Parties and is
20 in the public interest . Therefore, Staff recommends that
21 the Commission approve the Settlement, inclusive of all
22 attachments, without material changes or modifications .
23 Q. Does this conclude your testimony in this
24 proceeding?
25 A. Yes, it does .
CASE NO. IPC-E-25-16 ENGLISH, D. (Stip) 15
11/18/25 STAFF

Professional Qualifications
of
Donn English
Deputy Division Administrator - Utilities Division
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
EDUCATION
Mr. English graduated from Boise State University in 1998 with a
Bachelor of Business Administration degree in Accounting. His
studies concentrated on corporate finance and taxation. He was
a member of the Alpha Beta Psi honor society for Accounting
students . He completed the Annual Regulatory Studies Program,
the Advanced Regulatory Studies Program, and the Accounting and
Ratemaking Course offered through the Institute of Public
Utilities at Michigan State University. Additionally, he
regularly attends meetings and conferences sponsored by the
National Association of Regulatory Commissioners (NARUC) and the
Society of Utility and Regulatory Financial Analysts .
In 2001, Mr. English became a designated member of the American
Society of Pension Professionals and Actuaries (ASPPA) and was
awarded the professional designation of Qualified Pension
Administrator (QPA) and Qualified 401 (k) Administrator (QKA) .
Mr. English was also a member of the Association of Certified
Fraud Examinators .
BUSINESS EXPERIENCE
Prior to joining the Idaho Public Utilities Commission (IPUC) ,
Mr. English was a Trust Accountant with a pension
administration, actuarial, and consulting firm in Boise, Idaho .
In 1999, he was promoted to Pension Administrator, and in 2001
he was promoted to Pension Consultant . In that capacity, Mr.
English performed actuarial calculations and the required non-
discrimination calculations for hundreds of qualified retirement
plans . He completed and filed Form 5500s and represented
clients during audits by the Department of Labor and the
Internal Revenue Service . He also participated on the task
force that wrote questions for the ASPPA administrator and
actuarial exams .
Exhibit No . 101
Case No . IPC-E-25-16
D. English, Staff
11/18/25 Page 1 of 2

Mr. English joined the IPUC in 2003 as a Staff Auditor. In
2016, he was promoted to Audit Team Lead, and in 2018 he became
the Program Manager for the Accounting and Finance Department
within the Utilities Division. From September 2020 - March
2022, Mr. English also accepted the responsibility of
supervising the Technical Analysis and Energy Efficiency team
and was the Program Manager for that team until 2022 . In July
2025, Mr. English was promoted to Deputy Division Administrator
overseeing the Utilities Division where he is responsible for
Staff positions in all cases filed with the IPUC.
At the Commission, Mr. English has audited numerous utilities
including electric, water, and natural gas companies, and
provided comments and testimony in numerous cases that deal with
general rates, tax issues, pension issues, depreciation and
other accounting issues, and other regulatory policy decisions .
Mr. English participated in the Energy Efficiency Advisory
Groups and External Stakeholder Advisory Committees for Idaho
Power, Avista Utilities, Rocky Mountain Power, and Intermountain
Gas Company. He is a member of several of the National
Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC) working
groups including the NARUC State Working Group on Performance-
Based Regulation, the NARUC State Working Group on Electric
Vehicles, and the NARUC State Working Group on Grid-Interactive
Efficient Buildings in collaboration with the National
Association of State Energy Officials (NASEO) . Mr. English is
the Chair of the NARUC Staff Subcommittee on Education and
Research and the Vice Chair of the NARUC Staff Subcommittee of
Accounting and Finance . Mr. English is also a faculty member of
NARUC Rate School .
Exhibit No . 101
Case No . IPC-E-25-16
D. English, Staff
11/18/25 Page 2 of 2

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE THIS 181h DAY OF NOVEMBER 2025,
SERVED THE FOREGOING DIRECT TESTIMONY OF DONN ENGLISH IN SUPPORT
OF THE STIPULATION AND SETTLEMENT , IN CASE NO. IPC-E-25-16, BY E-
MAILING A COPY THEREOF, TO THE FOLLOWING:
DONOVAN E. WALKER TIMOTHY TATUM
MEGAN GOICOECHEA ALLEN CONNIE ASCHENBRENNER
IDAHO POWER COMPANY MATT LARKIN
PO BOX 70 1221 WEST IDAHO STREET
BOISE ID 83707-0070 P.O.BOX 70
E-MAIL: BOISE,ID 83707
dwalkergidahopower.com E-MAIL:
mfzoicoecheaallenkidahopower.com ttatumkidahopower.com
dockets(kidahopower.com caschenbrenner(kidahopower.com
mlarkin(kidahopower.com
CLEAN ENERGY OPPORTUNITIES: CLEAN ENERGY OPPORTUNITIES:
KELSEY JAE COURTNEY WHITE
920 N. CLOVER DRIVE MIKE HECKLER
BOISE, ID 83703 CLEAN ENERGY OPPORTUNITIES FOR
E-MAIL: kelsey(kkelseyjae.com IDAHO
3778 PLANTATION RIVER DR., STE 102
BOISE,ID 83703
EMAIL:
courtneykcleanenergyopportunities.com
mike c(r�,,cleanenergyopportunities.com
IIPA: IIPA:
ERIC L. OLSEN LANCE KAUFMAN,PH.D.
ECHO HAWK&OLSEN,PLLC 2623 NW BLUEBELL PLACE
P.O. BOX 6119 CORVALLIS, OR 97330
505 PERSHING AVE., STE. 100 E-MAIL: lance(kae.isg insi hg t.com
POCATELLO, ID 83205
E-MAIL: elokechohawk.com
BOISE CITY.• BOISE CITY.•
Ed Jewell Katie O'Neil
Deputy City Attorney Energy Program Manager
Boise City Attorney's Office Boise City Attorney's Office
P.O. Box 500 P.O. Box 500
Boise,ID 83701-0500 Boise, ID 83701-0500
eiewellkcityofboise.org koneil(kcityofboise.org
BoiseCityAttorney(kcityofboi se.org
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE - PAGE 1

FEA: FEA:
Emily W. Medlyn Dwight Etheridge
Jelani A. Freeman Exeter Associates,Inc.
U.S. Department of Energy 10480 Little Patuxent Parkway, Ste. 300
1000 Independence Ave., S.W. Columbia,MD
Washington,D.C. 20585 detheridgekexeterassociates.com
emily.medlyn(khq.doe.gov
j elani.freeman(khq.doe.gov
ICIP:
PETER J. RICHARDSON
RICHARDSON ADAMS, PLLC
515 N. 27"' STREET
BOISE,ID 83702
E-MAIL: peter(cr�richardsonadams.com
MICRON: MaHydro:
Austin Rueschhoff C. Tom Arkoosh
Thorvald A.Nelson Nicholas J. Erekson
Austin W.Jensen Arkoosh Law Offices
Kristine A.K. Roach P.O. Box 2900
Holland&Hart,LLP Boise, ID 83701
555 17"' St., Ste. 3200 tom.arkooshkarkoosh.com
Denver,CO 80202 nick.erekson(karkoosh.com
darueschhoffkhollandhart.com erin.cecil(c_r�,arkoosh.com
tnelsonkhollandhart.com
awj ensenkho llandhart.com
(cr�,�karoachhollandhart.com
ELECTRONIC SERVICE ONLY:
acleekhollandhart.com
tlfriel(khollandhart.com
Gannon, et al.,pro se: Korger:
John Gannon Kurt J.Boehm
johngannon200(kgmail.com Jody Keyle Cohn
Randy Morris occidentalpacifickhotmail.com Boeham,Kurtz&Lowry
Deborah Fease and Amy Lorrance 425 Walnut Street, Suite 2400
feased854(kgmail.com Cincinnati, OH 45202
kboelunkbkllawfirm.com
jkylercohn ckbkllawfirm.com
Northwest Energy Coalition (NWEC) Northwest Energy Coalition (NWEC)
Benjamin J. Otto Lauren McCloy
Attorney for NWEC Utility Regulatory Director
1407 W. Cottonwood Court lauren(knwenergy.org
Boise,ID 83702 Derek Goldman
benknwenergyy.org Policy Associate
derek(knwenergy.org
PATRICIA JORDA14, SECRETARY
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE - PAGE 2