20061012Comment.pdf

1M - u /+Jz-
iO/()/b&
/fa fir!
!-f
October 11 , 2006 \fF0\ _
. ,_.
Jack Goodman
4148 N. 1100 E.
Buhl, ID 83316
200& OCT I 2 AM 8:
IDAHO PU8L1C
UTILITIES COMMISSION
Commission Secretary
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
O. Box 83720
Boise, Idaho 83720-0074
Re: Case No. IPC-06-
Dear Commission
My neighbor and I are fortunate enough to have property on a site that is suitable for
hydro-electric generation. After researching the project for some time, including the
IPUC approved Schedule 84 Customer Energy Production Net Metering policy, we
decided to proceed with developing the site. We spent over $60 000 in installing state-of
the-art equipment to insure that we would have reliable production, and three years of
labor in building the installation. This most definitely was not a get-rich scheme, but
based on the cost of the installation and the income guaranteed under Schedule 84, we
figured it could pay back (exclusive of our labor) our costs in six to eight years.
In addition, we thought that this was a way we could do our part to contribute to the
development of much needed alternative energy sources. Our project is a completely non-
consumptive, non-polluting, renewable source of energy that produces enough electricity
to power six to eight average homes.
Idaho Power is proposing a revision of Schedule 84 that will penalize us for our
investment in the future of Idaho, a revision that will surely discourage other developers
from applying their initiative and their time and money to develop these sources of
energy.
In a time when other countries and other states in this country are doing what they can to
reduce their dependence on foreign oil, on coal-fired plants, on depleting our stores of
non-renewable energy, is Idaho going to take a step backwards by penalizing those who
are willing to take the risk of trying to accomplish this? Idaho Power is giving lip service
to the development of "Green Power" in their advertising. How much greener can power
be than what is developed by these small, privately developed sites?
I can imagine what the public reaction will be if this revision is allowed.
Sincerely,