20260817Final_Order_No_37138.pdf

Office of the Secretary
Service Date
August 17,2026
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF IDAHO POWER ) CASE NO. IPC-E-26-05
COMPANY'S APPLICATION FOR A )
DETERMINATION OF 2025 DEMAND-SIDE )
MANAGEMENT EXPENSES AS ) ORDER NO. 37138
PRUDENTLY INCURRED )
On March 13, 2026, Idaho Power Company ("Company") applied to the Idaho Public
Utilities Commission ("Commission") requesting an order designating expenditures of
$28,936,689 in Idaho Energy Efficiency Rider ("EE Rider") funds, and $8,939,724 of demand
response ("DR") program incentives, for a total of$37,876,413, as prudently incurred demand-
side management("DSM") expenses ("Application"). Application at 1-2.
On April 21, 2026, the Commission issued a Notice of Application and a Notice of
Modified Procedure, establishing written comment and reply deadlines. Order No. 37013.
Commission Staff("Staff') filed the only comments.
Based on our review of the record, we issue this Final Order approving the Application.
THE APPLICATION
The Company reported it spent $28,936,689 in EE Rider funds and $8,939,724 in DR
program incentives funded through base rates and tracked annually through the Power Cost
Adjustment mechanism in 2025. Application at 1. The Company represented that during 2025 it
saved 153,099 megawatt hours ("MWh") through its annual energy efficiency programs and
savings from Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance ("NEEA") Initiatives. Id. at 6. The Company
represented that overall, its savings from its energy efficiency portfolio experienced a year-over-
year increase of 7,689 MWh. Id. at 7. Additionally, the Company represented that its energy
efficiency portfolio remained cost-effective with a Utility Cost Test("UCT")ratio of 1.70, a Total
Recourse Cost ratio of 1.37, and a Participant Cost Test ratio of 1.78.Id.
The Company reported that it achieved a total non-coincident demand reduction of 161
megawatts ("MW") from its DR programs in 2025, out of an available capacity of 328 MW. Id.
The Company represented that its DR portfolio had a capacity exceeding 8.6% of the Company's
all-time system peak load available to respond to a "system peak load event" during summer
months. Id. The Company reported energy savings of 28,371 MWh from the residential sector,
ORDER NO. 37138 1

91,620 MWh from the commercial/industrial sector, and 5,400 MWh from the irrigation sector.
Id. at 6. The Company's 2025 DSM Annual Report described the Company's DSM strategies for
2026 and included supplements that: (1) showed the cost-effectiveness tests for each program; and
(2)provided program evaluations, reports, and surveys. 2025 DSM Annual Report; See also 2025
DSM Annual Report Supplements 1 and 2.
STAFF COMMENTS
Staff recommended the Commission approve the $28,936,689 in EE Rider funds and
$8,939,724 in DR program incentives as prudently incurred for the period January 1 to December
31, 2025. Staff Comments at 2. Staff believed the Company well documented its expenses, put
appropriate controls in place to ensure proper payment of costs, and had an effective internal
review process to identify and correct mistakes before a DSM report was filed.Id.
I. DSM Portfolio, EE Rider Balance & DR
Staff reviewed the Company's DSM portfolio and the DSM portfolio's energy savings.Id.
Based on its review, Staff believed the Company's DSM programs had been well managed and
were cost-effective. Id. Staff calculated that the EE Rider's over-funded balance rose
approximately $5.8 million throughout 2025. Id. at 4. Staff believed this increase was consistent
with historical patterns, which showed an increase of"approximately $4.3 million in 2023, $3.3
million in 2022,and$5.3 million in 2021."Id. Staff represented that it would monitor the EE Rider
balance.Id.
Staff noted that the Company spent approximately $3 million more in EE Rider
expenditures than it spent in 2024. Id. Staff believed the increase was due to increased expenses
for Commercial and Industrial program retrofits, which the Company attributed to increased
program activity. Id. at 4-5. Staff also reviewed the Company's DR programs and believed the
DR programs were managed well by the Company, were cost-effective, and were prudent. Id. at
11.
II. EE ProsEram Management
Staff believed the Company's EE programs were managed cost-effectively and that the
Company was taking appropriate steps to improve the performance of EE programs.Id. at 5. Staff
believed that the 2025 third-parry evaluation conducted to validate program savings and to
recommend ways to improve performance for the Heating and Cooling Efficiency ("H&CE")
program were necessary, even if the cost of the evaluation made the H&CE program not cost
ORDER NO. 37138 2

effective. Id. at 5-6. Staff reviewed the Company's changes to incentives for certain parts of the
H&CE program and developed the following table to detail the impact those changes had on the
cost-effectiveness forecasts for particular measures in the H&CE program:
Table No.2—H&CE Measure Cost-Effectiveness Forecasts
Measure UCT(before incentive change) UCT(after incentive change)
Ductless Heat Pump 0.60 0.63
Central A/C(15 SEER) 1.37 1.07
rC­entra_1A_/C(17 SEER) 1.14 0.97
Id. at 6. Staff believed the changes in participation for the central A/C measures would
positively impact the cost-effectiveness of the H&CE program.Id.
Staff agreed"with the third-party evaluator's recommendation that the Company continue"
utilizing the randomized control trial ("RCT") billing analysis to confirm Home Energy Reports
("HERs") program savings. Id. at 7-8. Staff believed that because several different factors could
affect household energy consumption, changes in savings might not be reflected in an estimate on
savings unless "a full RCT regression billing analysis" was completed. Id. at 8. Staff represented
it would continue working with the Company to increase the number of customers getting HERs
while also working to make sure there was no compromise to the HERs programs cost-
effectiveness or reported savings accuracy.Id.
Staff noted that the Residential New Construction program savings decreased from 3,309
kilowatt-hour ("kWh") per home in 2024, to 2,719 kwh per home in 2025. Id. at 10. Staff was
concerned that if the decrease in savings continued, the program would be at risk for no longer
being cost-effective. Id. Thus, Staff indicated it would continue to monitor the program's
performance. Id.
Staff reviewed and summarized the work the Company did on its residential rebate
advantage program, the weatherization assistance for qualified customers program, the
weatherization solutions for eligible customers program, the small business lighting program, and
the Company's plan to join the NEEA online marketplace pilot. Id. at 9-10.
COMMISSION FINDINGS AND DECISION
The Commission has jurisdiction over the Application and the issues in this case under
Title 61 of the Idaho Code including,Idaho Code §§ 61-501, -502, and-503. The Commission is
empowered to investigate rates, charges, rules, regulations, practices, and contracts of all public
ORDER NO. 37138 3

utilities and to determine whether they are just, reasonable, preferential, discriminatory, or in
violation of any provisions of law, and to fix the same by order. Idaho Code §§ 61-501, -502, and
-503.
The Commission has reviewed the record in this case. Based on our review,we find it fair,
just, and reasonable to approve the Application. We find that the Company's expenditures of
$28,936,689 in EE Rider funds and $8,939,724 in DR program incentives, for a total of
$37,876,413, for the period January 1 to December 31, 2025, were prudently incurred.
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Application is approved, and the Company's 2025
DSM expenditures of$28,936,689 in EE Rider funds and $8,939,724 in DR program incentives,
for a total of$37,876,413,for the period January 1 to December 31,2025,were prudently incurred.
THIS IS A FINAL ORDER. Any person interested in this Order may petition for
reconsideration within 21 days of the service date of this Order regarding any matter decided in
this Order.Within seven days after any person has petitioned for reconsideration, any other person
may cross-petition for reconsideration.Idaho Code § 61-626.
ORDER NO. 37138 4

DONE by Order of the Idaho Public Utilities Commission at Boise, Idaho this 17th day of
August 2026.
G
EDWARD LODGE, PR IDENT
J R. HAMMOND JR., COMMISSIONER
DAYN HA IE, COMMISSIONER
ATTEST:
o 1 a anchez
Commission Secretary
1 ALegahELECTRIC\IPC-E-26-05_DSM\orders\IPCE2605_FO_kr.docx
ORDER NO. 37138 5