20150623Comments (6 Total).pdf

09:17:03 p.m.06—22—2015 1
1H31—1995 O:OOAM FROM P.i
June 22,2015
711iJU23 AM 8:37
Fax [phone]
d.c.
II V
Idaho Public Utility Commission
P0 Box 83720
Boise,ID 83702
Re:WC-E-15-0l
Dear Commissioners Kjellander,Redford and Raper,
We want to voice our concerns regarding Idaho Power Company’s (We),Rocky Mountain Power (RMP)and
Avista requesting petition in limiting the PURPA contracts from 20-years to just 2-years.Idaho is blessed with
lots of days filled with sun light.As you already know,WC,RVW &Avista have invested millions of dollars in
coal fired plants,transmission lines along with numerous substations.Their rater-payers are the ones picking up
the tab for all of their facilities.Those utilities can leverage long-term contracts,while borrowing on those
assets,again and again and again at the expense ofthe rate-payers.
Now,those same utilities want to limit larger producer’s solar az4 wind contracts to just 2 years,while they pay
them at very low avoided costs.They claim they don’t need the additional electricity.At the same time they
want the rate-payers to pick up the tab for even more transmission line.They want to build many more
expensive 230 -500KV transmission lines in order to “wheel more power”across the state.They have even
already asked the WUC to allow them to swap out some of their facilities within those same utility companies
all while claiming they “need”those proposed facilities to balance out the power.They even propose to reduce
of value in large amortized amount for those same “used”equipment.What a total hypocrisy,it is amazing feat
of the pea under the nut shell game of hoodwinking the rate-payers.
Yet they certainly don’t want outside power producers to come into Jdaho with solar or wind!You have to ask
yourself WHY?it is so obvious they want to keep Idaho rate-payers under their thumbs and “keep business as
usual”.Yet they continue to contribute large sums of money to politicians and PAC committees.They also pay
their top executives HUGE salaries with HUGE benefits.
It is no mystery to us why they don’t contribute to all of Idaho University’s (or any other universities)for
further research in long term storage of solar or wind in a meaningfUl way.It seems as if they would rather see
the rater-payers deal with deadly health effects,not to mention the affects on the environment from using coal
power,than pay any other power producers for clean energy,especially in long-term contracts.
We urge the commissioners to uphold the PURPA intent and not reduce long term contracts from 20-years to
any other compromise of 10,5 or 2-year contracts.After all,if IPC “has too much poweC then can always sell
it to other utilities outside ofIdaho on those new transmission lines they are so busy building.
Sincerely,
Evereff&EileenVh?k1W 4
6177 Somerset Lane
Star,II)83669
Subject:Case Comment Form:Caroline Morris
Date:June 22,2015
To:<bevcrly.harker@ puc.idaho.eciv>,<jcan.icwcII (qpLtcidaho.gov>,<gene.tadness @puc.idaho.gov>
Cc:<l1eursnorris @ enun I
Name:Caroline Morris
Case Number:ipc-e-15-01
Email:lie ursmorris (emuil .cuiii
Telephone:[phone]
Address:1347 W Parkhill Drive
Boise ID,83702
Name of Utility Company:Idaho Power
Acknowledge public record:True
Dear PUC Commissioners Kjellander.Redford and Raper:
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on IPC-E-15-01,the Idaho Power Company’s request
to reduce the length of contracts to purchase power under PURPA.I am an Idaho Power residential
rate payer,and I urge you to deny this request,as explained below:
Idaho Powers proposal would inhibit or block solar development in Idaho,The desired shorter contract
length would bar solar companies seeking financial support from outside large investors,because they are
disinterested in short-term investments with no secure future.When a utility builds an expensive power plant
or transmission line,its customers repay costs for the projects entire lifetime,often 20-30 years.Clean energy
businesses deserve the same deal.Therefore,financially sound development of Idaho’s own clean energy resources
will require that PUC continue the 20-year long-tern contract rule for applicant businesses.
Why do we want to encourage clean energy in Idaho?As a rate-payer,I am annoyed that about 40%of customers
Idaho Power payments buy out-of-state produced coal and gas to generate our electricity.Both these fossil fuels pollute
the air and degrade the climate with carbon.We can no longer ignore human-caused environmental changes due to rising
carbon dioxide levels.The obvious alternative solution is to develop Idaho’s abundant solar potential.
New solar businesses could contribute much to local economies too:construction work,jobs and tax base growth.
If clean energy is Idaho’s goal,the PUC must continue to provide financially sound encouragement to solar energy
businesses operating in this state by maintaining the 20-year long-term contract rule.Keep the current,fair clean
energy rules.
I urge that Idaho Power’s desire for shorter term contracts must be denied.
Because you as PUC Commissioners are chosen by Governor Otter,you have the ethical responsibility
to make clear that this PUC decision is free of political and economic influence.In 2014,Idaho Power gave
the Governor’s reelection campaign $5000 and its executives donated $10,000 more.Please ignore all political
influence and deny the current request.Other states and countries courageously have protected the environment
and the earth,so please help Idaho to do so too.
Jean Jewell
From:[e-mail]
Sent:Monday,June 22,2015 6:34 PM
To:Beverly Barker;Jean Jewell;Gene Fadness
Cc:[e-mail]
Subject:Case Comment Form:Bill Chisholm
Name:Bill Chisholm
Case Number:IPC-E-15-0l
Email:chisholm3(mindspting.com
Telephone:[phone]
Address:19@73E Hwy 30
Buhl Idaho,83316
Name of Utility Company:Idaho Power Co and other regulated electrical utilities doing
business in Idaho Acknowledge public record:True
Comment:I have been involved in Idaho energy issues for over forty years,I have
participated in the planning processes,advanced the solar for schools program,an energy
efficiency education program using $02 Credit dollars,submitted an Idaho energy plan to the
Legislature’s Interim Energy Committee’s website before the committee even had its first
meeting.That plan emphasized energy efficiency,conservation and renewables.
It seems to me somewhat ridiculous that we are even having this conversation,not because I
don’t think that there are some legitimate questions regarding the size of PURPA projects and
the requirement,but because the utilities themselves have been very myopic in facing a
reality that has been coming down the pike,and which I have been speaking and advocating for
thirty years.I urged the utilities to get in the business,to install their own point of
use,distributed systems.
We have to get away from coal..it is ridiculous that at this stage in our state and nation’s
energy portfolio that we are still using this antiquated,polluting and environmentally
destructive energy source.
Two years is a ridiculous proposal for contract tenure.We need to get real.The utilities
were granted a monopoly in exchange for public regulation that is meant to protect the public
interest,the public good.Its late in the game the utilities shouldn’t be trying to slow
down and stop,they should be trying to figure out how to make it work.
I’m not a fan of utility sized solar projects out in the wilds or on public land,I would
like to see them over parking lots and on roof tops of industrial and commercial size
building,particularly buildings and at industrial sites that are demanding large amounts of
energy,particularly during peak energy usage.
Coal aside,I believe that we need to be more cognizant of the hydro side of the electrical
production equation.Ongoing drought in the West may be focused on the intense state of
water shortage in California,but Idaho is not immune to water shortage potential,which
means solar makes even more sense.
It is time for the regulated utilities to step to the plate with constructive proposals that
moves us towards an efficient and clean energy future.Shorting the contract period for
PURPA projects to two years is not constructive.I’m not saying that 20 years is a necessary
and reasonable mark either.Maybe 10 to 15 is a more reasonable contract period,but if the
utilities aren’t going to step to the plate then PURPA projects are going to have to get us
there.
1
Jean Jewell
From:[e-mail]
Sent:Tuesday,June 23,2015 12:15 PM
To:Beverly Barker;Jean Jewell;Gene Fadness
Cc:[e-mail]
Subject:Case Comment Form:Paul Hartl
Name:Paul Harti
Case Number:IPC-E-15-01
Email:paulhattlO77(agmai1.com
Telephone:[phone]
Address:PC Box 6481
Ketchum ID,83340
Name of Utility Company:Idaho Power
Acknowledge public record:True
Comment:Please deny Idaho Powers request to shorten the contract length with independent
power producers from 20 to 2 years.This move is meant to,and would surely destroy most
non-fossil fuel power producers by making investment in these firms far riskier.Changing
these terms midstream should not even be considered,and would show extremely bad faith on
the part of IPUC toward all but an elite few of wealthy,powerful and well-connected power
producers.
Unique Identifier:70.171.129.243
1
Jean Jewell
From:[e-mail]
Sent:Tuesday,June 23,2015 2:56 PM
To:Beverly Barker;Jean Jewell;Gene Fadness
Cc:[e-mail]
Subject:Case Comment Form:Norman Hill
Name:Norman Hill
Case Number:IIPC =E-15-01
Email:bethnotm(cableone.net
Telephone:[phone]
Address:6900 W Portneuf Rd
Pocatello Idaho,83204
Name of Utility Company:Idaho Power Co
Acknowledge public record:True
Comment:My wife.Beth,and I are concerned with the length of PURPA contracts (those
existing and upcoming contracts).Twenty years is not in the best interest of customers.
When Idaho Poweer is required to sign contracts for a period of 20 years,it has the
potential to cause higher utility rates for customers.We now enjoy very reasonable and fair
rates and would prefer that not change.We feel if Idaho Power is required to sign contracts,
they should be no longer than 2 years.
Unique Identifier:96.18.235.162
1
Jean Jewell
From:Gene Fadness
Sent:Tuesday,June 23,2015 10:24 AM
To:Jean Jewell
Subject:FW:Ken Miller of Snake River Alliance Gave me Your Name
Attachments:Investor Owned Utilities are Failing US Presentation June 201 5.pptx
From:[e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent:Tuesday,June 23,2015 9:20 AM
To:Gene Fadness;kmiller©snakeriveralliance.org
Subject:Ken Miller of Snake River Alliance Gave me Your Name
Gene
Ken Miller gave me your name as a contact who can help me provide the attached presentation to the Idaho Public Utility
Commission Case Number:IPC-E-15-01.If need be,I can also testify.
I feel that Idaho Power Co.specifically and all the Northwest Investor Owned Utilities (IOU)must think outside the box.
And it is the IPUC’s responsibility to motivate them to give rate payers an equal advantage to stockholders and company
management.Solar technology costs are within reach of each community.When Henry Ford up scaled the assembly
line for making cars,I bet the buggy whip manufactures where very upset and would have liked to control the market to
prevent the advantages of scale.Idaho Power can control the market for electricity as a buggy whip manufacture
equivalent.Is the IPUC going to let it happen?
Steve Nelson
19810 E.Onyx Ln.
Spokane,WA 99217
Phone -509-995-2043
email [e-mail]
1
Le
g
e
n
d
Id
t
h
o
Po
’
e
r
Un
e
s
—
16
1
k
V
—
23
0
k
V
—
34
6
k
V
—
5J
U
k
V
Ot
h
c
r
U
t
t
y
Li
n
e
s
.a
34
5
V
9J
O
k
V
Po
w
e
r
th
i
i
n
k
s
th
e
y
ca
n
ge
t
dL
e
c
U
L
t
u
r
e
ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
/
m:
t
h
e
Bo
a
r
d
9O
N
N
e
V
I
U
.
E
PC
E
R
DM
I
N
.
(H
o
t
S
u
f
l
n
Al
l
th
e
No
r
t
h
w
e
s
t
I
th
e
y
wi
l
l
ge
t
ne
e
J
e
d
fr
o
m
so
m
e
w
co
n
s
th
e
Ca
n
n
P’
c
i
r
I
c
P’
Y
R
in
k
o
St
b
o
n
P—
i
s
—
6r
o
w
i
e
e
6t
Pd
h
o
-
N
c
i
t
h
v
e
t
MI
c
c
c
Wt
1W
N
FA
L
L
S
J
Co
n
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
an
o
t
h
e
r
RO
C
K
Y
MO
U
N
T
.
a
4
N
I
I
1:.
a,-..
I
I4Li(•
A
e
Is
th
e
r
e
a
Lo
s
s
of
Lo
a
d
in
th
e
Fu
t
u
r
e
Wh
e
n
Ev
e
r
y
o
n
e
is
lo
o
k
i
n
g
so
m
e
w
h
e
r
e
el
e
fo
r
po
w
e
r
?
0
is
th
e
r
e
a
de
s
e
r
t
of
re
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
in
ou
r
fu
t
u
r
e
?
Mt
-
tJ
—
4
w
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
2;
i
-
--
—
Id
a
h
o
Pu
b
l
i
c
Ut
i
l
i
t
y
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
’
s
re
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
is
to
Gu
i
d
e
us
th
r
o
u
g
h
th
i
s
Bu
s
i
n
e
s
s
Mo
d
e
l
_
C
h
a
n
g
e
__
_
--
-
-
1_
L
.
_
Z
u—
Ho
w
do
e
s
th
i
s
ap
p
l
y
to
th
e
IP
U
C
Ca
s
e
IP
C
-
E
-
1
5
-
O
1
ID
A
H
O
PO
W
E
R
CO
M
P
A
N
Y
’
S
PE
T
I
T
I
O
N
TO
MO
D
I
F
Y
TE
R
M
S
AN
D
CO
N
D
I
T
I
O
N
S
OF
PU
R
P
A
PU
R
C
H
A
S
E
AG
R
E
E
M
E
N
T
S
Th
e
ba
s
i
c
pr
e
m
i
s
e
of
pr
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
n
a
n
c
e
is
th
a
t
le
n
d
e
r
s
lo
a
n
mo
n
e
y
fo
r
h
e
dé
v
e
I
o
p
r
e
n
t
of
a
pr
o
j
e
c
t
so
l
e
l
y
ba
s
e
d
on
th
e
sp
e
c
i
f
i
c
pr
o
j
e
c
t
s
ri
s
k
s
an
d
fu
t
u
r
e
ca
s
h
fl
o
w
s
.
As
su
c
h
,
pr
o
j
e
c
t
fi
n
a
n
c
e
is
a
me
t
h
o
d
of
fi
n
a
n
c
i
n
g
in
wh
i
c
h
th
e
le
n
d
e
r
s
to
a
pr
o
j
e
c
t
ha
v
e
ei
t
h
e
r
no
rè
c
o
u
r
s
ë
or
on
l
y
li
m
i
t
e
d
re
c
o
u
r
s
e
to
th
e
pa
r
e
n
t
co
m
p
a
n
y
th
a
t
de
v
e
l
o
p
s
or
tt
,,
.
&
sp
o
n
s
o
r
s
th
e
pr
o
j
e
c
t
.
•
..•.-4
•-,•::
:•
•j
f.
I
_1
0
-.-.-j.