20260723Decision Memo.pdf

DECISION MEMORANDUM
TO: COMMISSIONER LODGE
COMMISSIONER HAMMOND
COMMISSIONER HARDIE
COMMISSION SECRETARY
COMMISSION STAFF
LEGAL
FROM: KELSEA E. ROSS
DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL
DATE: JULY 23, 2026
SUBJECT: IN THE MATTER OF JOSEPH HUBER'S FORMAL COMPLAINT
AGAINST ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER,A DIVISION OF PACIFICORP;
CASE NO. PAC-E-26-10.
On June 16, 2026, Joseph Huber filed a formal complaint ("Complaint") with the Idaho
Public Utilities Commission ("Commission") against PacifiCorp, doing business as Rocky
Mountain Power, ("Company") alleging that the Company failed to comply with the National
Electrical Safety Code("NESC")and the ordinances of the City of Downey, Idaho("Ordinances")
regarding a private power pole ("Power Pole") located on his neighbor's property. Complaint at 1.
On July 7, 2026, the Company filed an answer to the Complaint("Answer") and a motion
to dismiss the Complaint("Motion"). Answer and Motion at 1. The Company alleged: (1)that the
Company does not own the Power Pole; and (2) that the Company has been to Mr. Huber's
property on multiple occasions to assess the Power Pole; and(3)that during its assessments it did
not identify any emergency or safety concerns with the Power Pole. Id. at 2-3. The Company
requested the Commission dismiss the Complaint for its failure to specify any legal authority that
imposes a duty on the Company to complete the actions Mr.Huber argued it is required to perform.
Id. at 3.
RECOMMENDATION
Counsel for the Commission ("Counsel") reviewed the Complaint, the Answer, and the
Motion. Based on its review, Counsel recommends that the Commission issue an order setting a
reply deadline for Mr. Huber to respond to the Answer and the Motion.
DECISION MEMORANDUM 1

The Commission has the discretion to decide how a formal complaint will be processed.
IDAPA 31.01.01.054.05. The Commission can issue a summons on the person or company that
the complaint is directed at,open an investigation,or require the complaint to be processed through
informal procedure with Commission Staff. Id. An answer to a motion must be filed as soon as
possible,but no later than 14 days after the motion is served. IDAPA 31.01.01.057.03.
No certificate of service was included in the Answer and Motion. However, based on
representations from the Company's attorney, it is Counsel's understanding that the Company
mailed a copy of the Answer and Motion to Mr. Huber at P.O. Box 114, Downey, Idaho 83234,
which was represented as Mr. Huber's address in the Complaint. The Company also indicated on
the cover letter to its Answer and Motion that the same were sent to Mr. Huber "[v]ia US Mail."
Answer and Motion Cover Letter at 1.
Because a certificate of service was not included in the Answer and Motion, but there are
facts indicating that the Answer and Motion were provided to Mr. Huber, Counsel believes there
are questions regarding verification of if, and when, Mr. Huber received the Answer and Motion.
To ensure that due process is fully observed, Counsel recommends that the Commission issue an
order that directs Mr. Huber to respond to the Answer and Motion within 14 days of the service
date of the Commission's order. If Mr. Huber responds to the Answer and Motion, Counsel
recommends that the Commission review the response to determine if additional action is required
to process the Complaint. If Mr. Huber fails to respond to the Answer and Motion, Counsel
recommends that the Commission finalize processing the Complaint.
COMMISSION DECISION
Does the Commission wish to issue an order that directs Mr. Huber to file an answer to the
Answer and Motion within 14 days of the service date of the Commission's order?
Kelsea E. Ross
Deputy Attorney General
IALegaITLECTRICTAC-E-26-10_HubeArnemosTACE2610_dec 1_kr.docx
DECISION MEMORANDUM 2