20170901Comments (13).pdf

Diane Holt
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
[e-mail]
Thursday, August 31,2017 2:49 PM
Beverly Barker; Diane Holt; Matthew Evans
Case Comment Form: Johnny Galgano
Name:Johnny Galgano
Case Number: IPC-E-17-13
Email : [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 180 Cloverly Lane
Hailey lDAHO,83333
Name of Utility Company: ldaho Power Company
Comment:TO:COMMISSIONER KJELLANDER COMMISSIONER RAPER COMMISSIONER ANDERSON COMMISSION
SECRETARY COM M ISSION STAFF
FROM:JOHNNY GALGANO 180 CLOVERLY LANE
HAILEY, IDAHO 83333
DATE: AUGUST 31, 2017
SUBJECT:IDAHO POWER COMPANY.S APPLICATION FOR AUTHORITY TO ESTABLISH NEW S SCHEDULES FOR RESIDENTIAL
AND SMALL GENERAL SERVICE CUSTOIVIERS WITH ON- SITE GENERATION, CASE NO.IPC.E-I7.I3,
I have been made aware of ldaho Power Company request for new rate schedules for solar power providers within the
state of ldaho. Let me be clear there are two ways to do things, the right way and again. This rush to change the rate
schedules for new solar power providers to ldaho Power Company is short sighted in its research and development. This
new rate schedule will dissuades potential providers of solar power to ldaho Power Company which is harmful not only
to those providers but the ldaho population in general. By using renewable energy sources and moving away from
harmful energy sources such as coal and oil we help ourselves, our neighbors, our country and our world. We need to
start thinking and acting globally if we wish to leave a viable world for our future generations.
I constructed a new home in 2015 and built a 9.1Kw solar power system and I currently use net metering with the ldaho
Power Company. Should these rate changes come to pass it will only pave the way for other rate changes to existing
solar power providers to ldaho Power Company. At that time I will remove myself from the grid, install a battery system
and keep all of the generated power for my own use and not share the excess with ldaho Power Company who then
sells it off. This is a lose lose situation for both my family, my neighbors who can use my excess energy and ldaho Power
Company as they will not be servicing my home in any way shape or form.
Please carefully consider ldaho Power Company's application and reject their request for rate schedule changes.
Respectfully,
Johnny Galgano
1
Unique ldentifier: 68.105.215.101
Diane Holt
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
steve@ berkeleyinc.com
Friday, August 18,2017 9:40 AM
Beverly Barker; Diane Holt; Matthew Evans
Case Comment Form: Stephen White, CFA
Name: Stephen White, CFA
Case Number: IPCE1713
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 3778 Plantation River Dr, Suite 102
Boise 1D,83703
Name of Utility Company: ldaho Power
Comment: As a financial advisor who is often contacted for advice on whether to install solar panels, I am deeply
frustrated at ldaho Power's recent filing. lt sheds no light on the value of solar, all it does is sow confusion and
uncertainty. That level of uncertainty is made worse and more permanent by proposing a policy that customers
investing in on-site generation products offered by ldaho Power's few competitors will be put in a tiny separate class
which will thereafter be vulnerable to discriminatory rates and fees.
Let's go back to a fundamental principle of investing - the greater the risk, the higher the potential return needs to be to
motivate investment. By proposing a policy that increases the risk of solar investments, ldaho Power is unnecessarily
discouraging investment in solar. To be clear, there is always some level of uncertainty in investment decisions and
specifically with electricity rates, but ldaho Powe/s proposal to put net metering customers into their own tiny class
creates a disproportionate level of risk and uncertainty for prospective solar customers and the businesses that serve
them.
For example, a non-profit board asked me to present last night my recommendations regarding the installation of a solar
array to offset a portion of their electric bill. At least half the discussion and the majority of the concerns centered on
the filing before the PUC, including a wide range of speculations on how the economics of the investment might change
in the future. The Board's readiness to invest in a solar array was markedly affected by the discriminatory tone and cloud
of uncertainty created by this filing.
ln this filing, prospective solar customers are being told that installing an array of ANY size will thereafter make them
vulnerable to discriminatory rate structures, that ldaho Power would like to change the economics of the investment the
customer is considering, but that ldaho Power doesn't have the evidence to propose fair policies.
ln terms of credentials, I have an undergraduate degree in finance, an MBA from Harvard, and hold the Chartered
Financial Analyst (CFA) designation - I believe I qualify as an economically logical person, and this filing lacks logic. ldaho
Power's real concerns are revealed by its focus on "On-Site Generation," which is not the issue. The Company also uses
the filing to reiterate its long-term concern that it recoups fixed costs via volumetric pricing, which, as I understand it,
was a strategic move by the PUC to encourage energy conservation. ln any event, it is a concern not specific to ldaho
Power, and certainly not specific to net metering.
Net metering customers should remain in their current rate classes. They should be free to buy kWh off the grid and pay
the same monthly and volumetric rates as other standard customers. Concerns over cost shifting should prioritize the
big dollars, and - only if it's demonstrated as truly material - any concerns over the value of kWh put back on the grid
should focus on determining value, including the benefits of solar and the timing at which it is generated. Discriminatory
1
policies like this one before the PUC create disproportionate and unnecessary risk for prospective investments in solar,
and it's a job killer for this young and vital industry.
U niq ue ldentifier: 67 .42.7 2.t03
2
Diane Holt
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
[e-mail]
Thursday, August 17,2017 3:18 PM
Beverly Barker; Diane Holt; Matthew Evans
Case Comment Form: Rex Hanson
Name: Rex Hanson
Case Number: IPC-E-17-13
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address:
Caldwell 1D,83605
Name of Utility Company: ldaho Power
Comment: I am writing to request that the ldaho PUC deny ldaho Power's request to establish new rate classes targeting
net metering customers.
As a net metering customer since April 2OL6,l have been very pleased with the net meter installation and service
provided to date by ldaho Power. I also have sympathy for lP management as they deal with the budget and planning
impacts from this disruptive technology. However, I feel that this most recent proposal for new rate classes is
premature and doesn't fully address several key issues:
1) Why target only net meter customers without comparing the costs & revenues from the full spectrum of ldaho users
eg rural vs city, low vs high volume users, etc?
2) Can we see more projection scenarios for load balancing as additional net metering customers join the grid? I would
expect peak load requirements (and costs to lP) would be reduced over time with additional solar power users. Graphs
shown in the ldaho Power documents seem to support this, but are incomplete as they compare "average" users, not
the total impact on the system (Aschenbrenner - Figure 3).
3) ldaho Power currently offers several incentives to customers to save energy and reduce use of power &
environmental impact. Assuming we want to continue to support this admirable goal, does the PUC wish to slow the
growth of solar power benefits and the related job creation, by introducing uncertainty to the economic benefits at this
time?
4) Over the 5 year planning period, has the full impact of improving solar technology been included? lf panel & battery
technology and costs continue to improve, use of the current grid will continue to change and likely be reduced. I think
that the PUC and public need to be better informed about how the grid costs will be paid in the future. lncreasing grid
costs to specific consumers will encourage those folks to avoid grid use and further increase the cost recovery problem -
a potential downward spiral.
I appreciate the opportunity to provide my opinion here
Respectfully,
Rex Hanson
Caldwell, ldaho
1
Unique ldentifier: 67 .6L.7L7 .L45
Naomi Carr
From:Diane Holt
Thursday, August 31,2017 4:27 PM
Jo Nelson; Reyna Quintero
NaomiCarr
FW: Case number: PC-E-'17-13, Comments on ldaho Power's request to change the net
metering billing class
Rebutta14ldaho PowersRateChangeNetMeteri ng.docx
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
-----Origina I Message-----
From : gSoren [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, August 37,2077 4:25 PM
To: Diane Holt <[e-mail]>
Subject: Case number : PC-E-17-13, Comments on ldaho Power's request to change the net metering billing class
Diane,
Attach are my comments regarding Case number PC-E-17-1-, ldaho Power's request for changes for Net metering
customers.
Regards,
Gordon Sorensen
1
gSoren
[e-mail]
tFc- ri- tt-t3
ln regards to ldaho Power's request to create a new rate structure for net metering customers, ldaho
Power should first change the billing structure so that all customers pay directly for the ldaho Power
services they use. Then accurately and fairly determine the what and how much to cover each of these
services and then appropriately charge all customers, including net metering customers. Penalizing a
select set of customers for using less electricity is discriminatory and unfair.
From Tatum's deposition; "customers with on-site generation mav pav less than their fair share for the
grid-related services thev require"
ldaho Power's proposal to create a new rate structure and to later charge net metering customers more
for not paying their "fair share" does not truly address the problem of not paying their "fair share". lt
mostly just moves it around, actually making it worse as it further obfuscates the billing charges. The way
to correct this issue is to improve the transparency of the billing charges. By identifying what services and
products the customer has requested and used, the billing should fairly and accurately reflect what
customers would pay for their fair share. Burying the different services and products in the "volumetric"
charges hides the true costs of the services and products being purchase and consumed.
The main argument being presented for moving net metering customers into a different and eventually
higher rate structure appears to be the "fair share" issue. ldaho power asserts that net metering
customers use less power through generation of their own power. They therefore are avoiding paying
"their fair share" of the fixed costs associated with connecting to the grid. On the shiny surface of that
arguement, that is true, but dig deeper. What about the customer that kicks his electric hot water heater
to the curb and installs a gas or a solar hot water system. They are using less power. By the current logic,
that customer is also guilty of not paying their fair share. Why are they not charged more for their
remaining kWh consumption?
The net metering customer, in the course of generating their own power, potentially is not paying some
of that "fair share", like the cost of banking the excess generated power for later consumption. But
before singling out the net metering customer, I suggest that ldaho Power figure out what is truly this
"fair share" of the fixed costs along with the individual components therein. This cost for accessing the
grid should be fairly and accurately determined for all the different classes of customers and that cost
should be listed as a base charge(s) on the customer's monthly billing. The current 55 fee is most likely
purely symbolic and woefully inadequate to recovering the fixed costs of the system. lndeed as I read
Connie Aschenbrenner's testimony, she states:
"The residential customers taking service under schedule 1, Residential Service, have a two-part rate
desien with most of the customer related fixed costs and all demand related fixed costs being recovered
through volumetric charees. The revenue reouirement for the residential customer class is comprised of
approximatelv 70% fixed costs and 30 percent variable energv costs; however onlv five oercent of the
total revenue is collected throueh the fixed service charge and the remainins 95% is collected throush
the volumetric energv charge."
Holy smokes, our power bills are mostly to cover the costs of just having the grid! So my March 2016
S100.38 bill for 1050 kwhr of power covered S75 of fixed cost and S25 for the 1050 kWh I used or 2.4
cents per kWh. Can you even buy power that cheap? That is nuts. How can ldaho power be profitable?
And just a small reduction in usage is going to bankrupt them. lf those are truly fixed costs then all the
customers should be paying at least a SZS fixed service charge. Why on earth did ldaho Power ever have
energy reduction programs like wrapping hot water heaters with insulating blankets? That program alone
should have nearly broke the bank.
JACKSON C. GOSS
1825 W Lemhi St, Boise ID 83705
pH oN E 208-9 12-624 1, EMAIL J GOSS 1 5 9 @GMArL. C OM
fle- {--t-l' t13u Pl{ 2: h3 27 Augast2077
Subject Altemative Energy Rate Increases
To:
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
472W Washington St
Boise ID 83702
I would like to exptess my opposition to Idaho Power's ptoposed rate inctease for altemative energy
customers. They claim that normal customers are picking up the costs of alternative energy
customets.
Backgtound on me: I zm a middle class American Millennial. I just puchased my first house in the
Bench neighborhood. I was so excited to contribute to clean and safe energy that I had a solar
power system installed on my roof within 3 months of buying my house. I couldn't afford to offset
all of the electdcity that my family collsrunes, only a small percentage of it Q0-40 7o depending on
weather). My Enancial decision to go with solar power was based on current rates, and I am by no
means saving a ton of money, it will take a frrll 30 years to pay back the cost of solar. I also did this
for the environment--to switch ftom traditional fuel sources, such as coal or natural gas to
somethiog more sustainable.
I was disheartened to hear that Idaho Power was targeting solar and wind producers specifically to
raise mtes. Since I do not offset my entite power bill, I still am impacted by normal rate increases to
normal customers, AND rate increases to solar customers. I feel that the costs fot powet should be
ptoportionally spread based on how much power a customer uses.
Fufthet, customers, such as myself who ptoduce powef should receive tegular retail rates because
the power generated via solat or other renewable soutces improves the ovemll electrical grid and
lowers the need to buy power at peak times of demand.
In summary, I strongly oppose Idaho Power's rate increase targeted at solar and wind customers.
Sincerely,
il""'
Jackson Goss
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Diane Holt
Wednesday, August 30,2017 3:10 PM
Diane Holt
tPC-E-17-13
From: [e-mail] Imailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of David Harris
Sent: Wednesday, August 30,2017 2:51PM
To: IPC-E-17-13 rris. boise. id.us
Subiect: IPC-E-17-13
I have to items to address.
First, as a senior member of IEEE, and an Electrical Engineer with a PE license in Idaho, I applaud the
recommendation to require the installation and operation of smart inverter(s) for all new customer-owned
generator interconnection. However, I believe the delay of 60 days from IEEE adoption of a standard to its
enforcement would unduly burden potential new "R&SGS" customers; starting with those who are already in
the process of either designing/installing their own PV Solar, or those using the services of companies providing
end-to-end solutions, or anywhere in between, I think that delay should be extended from 60 days to something
more on the order of 180 days.
Secondly, I would suggest that some errant logic is in play in the application. That the "Company" needs to
establish new rate schedules in order to prove its inherent assumption that its "existing rate design inaccurately
reflects the costs and benefits of serving customers that
have on-site generation" makes an assumption (the adverb inaccurately) that has not been proven true, and bases
its request thereon. A rate structure will only help separate out a sub-segment of customers, it will not help
determine what power they use or generate; that information, I would suggest, is already buried in the data the
"Company" keeps for every account. Separating customers into a new rate structure is overreach when a simple
spreadsheet sort or database query filter would do the same thing. In other words, I think they're doing things
oUt oforder.
Thanks for the opportunity to comment.
1
Diane Holt
Diane Holt
From:
Sent:
To:
[e-mail]
Tuesday, August 29,2017 3:26 PM
Beverly Barker; Diane Holt; Matthew Evans
Case Comment Form: Sandra SchoenhutSubject:
Name: Sandra Schoenhut
Case Number: IPC-E-17-13
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address:4885 North Five Mile
Boise lD, 83773
Name of Utility Company: ldaho power
Comment: I am writing to object to ldaho Power's proposed increases in net metering. We have just installed solar
power on our home. We will be paying for the system for the next 20 years. Had we known that we could be charged a
higher rate simply by installing solar panels, we would not have done it. This requested change would create a hardship
for us since we will be paying for the panels along with a higher power bill. This change will definately cause others to
decide NOT to install renewable energy while renewable energy should be encouraged. The number of users is small
and even future projections put the number at a very small percentage of users. I am requesting that this proposal be
rejected.
Unique ldentifier: 66.87 .726.102
1
Cost lncrease Proposed by ldaho Power for Customers with Solar or Wind Turbines
Citizen Comment to the ldaho Public Utilities Commission
PoBox8372oBoise,ldaho8372o-oo74:FAX:[phone]?.:..
Case Number: IPC-E-17-13
11 a')f: "JL .t{ 9: 0l
My power company is i dc,ko /o,n .r-
I want ldaho Public Utilities Commission to know:
E_ | want to keep solar and wind power affordable in ldaho..l-
_ I may want to put solar power on my property in the future
_ I like solar & wind power because they will bring thousands of jobs to ldaho.
'to+t',2"
_ I would like to see a state incentive program for installation of solar and/or wind.
\o ldaho Power should continue to pay for power generated by customers; keep
Schedule 84 that provides net metering.
_ ldaho Power should embrace solar power because it reduces the need for power during
the day when air conditioners are running the most.
_ ldaho should work with their customers to develop strategies to encourage distributed
generation, as other power companies do.
_ ldaho Power should invest in more renewable energy and divest from fossilfuels.
_ ldaho Power should reimburse the cost of a home owner's solar system because they
reduce the need for more infrastructure (power lines, power plants, etc.).
Additional Message to ldaho Public Utilities Commission:
Signed:U,n , [Vtr ',Date:,'-a--n
Your Name:U tn ct,.t(^ M.'^ roFv
Address: ZL J
Qo r,.*<lkt State: I \)Zip:t3zo
1
Emait: f'lv,vtf e r\L{. rJ<-
I ocknowledge thot submitting a comment in on open cose constituent o public record under ldoho Code 74-
101 (1i) and oll information provided by me on the is form is ovoiloble for public ond media inspection. My
comment may be reviewed by the utility.
v
{
City:
Cost lncrease Proposed by ldaho Power for Customers with Solar or Wind Turbines
Citizen Comment to the ldaho Public Utilities Commission
P O Box 83720 Boise, ldaho 8372O-OO74: FAX: [phone]
Case Number: !PC-E-17-13 j i,i,rj ,r2 $,t;1 9, li,i
My power company is
lwant ldaho Public Utilities Commission to know:
/twantto keep solar and wind power affordable in ldaho.
,// I may want to put solar power on my property in the future
/ t tike solar & wind power because they will bring thousands of jobs to ldaho.
2!l wouldlike to rtsffit incentive program for installation of solar and/or wind.
Z ldaho Power should continue to pay for power generated by customers; keep
Schedule 84 that provides net metering.
,/ U^no Power should embrace solar power because it reduces the need for power during
-.:
::!
the day when air conditioners are running the most.
/ tdaho should work with their customers to develop strategies to encourage distributed
generation, as other power companies do.
/ tdaho Power should invest in more renewable energy and divest from fossil fuels.
ldaho Power should reimburse the cost of a home owner's solar system because they
reduce the need for more infrastructure (power lines, power plants, etc.).
Additional Message to ldaho Public Utilities Commission:
Signed Date:l-ol
Your Name:CoA
Address q5b \J Q-J!
0on.*J \u
J fo zip:t3>aqCity:State:
Email ?()
I ocknowledge that submitting a comment in on open case constituent o public record under ldaho Code 74-
101 (13) and oll informotion provided by me on the is form is availoble for public ond medio inspection. My
comment moy be reviewed by the utility.
/
t
Cost lncrease Proposed by ldaho Power for Customers with Solar or Wind Turbines
Citizen Comment to the ldaho Public Utilities Commission
P O Box 83720 Boise, ldaho 83720-0074; FAX: [phone]
Case Number: IPC-E-17-13
My power company is
lwant ldaho Public Utilities Commission to know:
jzfl want to keep solar and wind power affordable in ldaho
_ I may want to put solar power on my property in the future.
_ I like solar & wind power because they will bring thousands of jobs to ldaho.
u' te*erft-l t would like to see"a-st'aTe incentive program for installation of solar and/or wind.
_ ldaho Power should continue to pay for power generated by customers; keep
Schedule 84 that provides net metering.
_ ldaho Power should embrace solar power because it reduces the need for power during
the day when air conditioners are running the most.
_ ldaho should work with their customers to develop strategies to encourage distributed
generation, as other power companies do.
i.z" ldaho Power should invest in more renewable energy and divest from fossilfuels.
_ ldaho Power should reimburse the cost of a home owner's solar system because they
reduce the need for more infrastructure (power lines, power plants, etc.).
Additional Message to ldaho Public Utilities Commission:
Signed:Date:-l
Your Name K"fl" &r+
Address 1=f
City:lo rolnlb State:I+Zip:8>o t
Email:I ISU.
I ocknowledge thot submitting o comment in on open cose constituent a public record under ldaho Code 74-
101 (13) and all informotion provided by me on the is form is ovoiloble for public ond medio inspection. My
comment moy be reviewed by the utility.
Cost lncrease Proposed by ldaho Power for Customers with Solar or Wind Turbines
Citizen Comment to the ldaho Public Utilities Commission
P O Box 83720 Boise, ldaho 83720-0074; FAX: [phone]
Case Number: IPC-E-17-13
My power company is [44J.^o )ar\f
lwant ldaho Pubtic Utilities Commission to know:
-'{wantto keep solar and wind power affordable in ldaho.
Z(l ^^ywant to put solar power on my property in the future.I.^'+ caao
_ I like solar & wind power because they will bring thousands of jobs to ldaho.
\retler_ I would like to see aEfate incentive program for installation of solar and/or wind
y' ldaho Power should continue to pay for power generated by customers; keep
ScheduleS4 that provides net metering.
_ ldaho Power should embrace solar power because it reduces the need for power during
the day when air conditioners are running the most.
_ ldaho should work with their customers to develop strategies to encourage distributed
generation, as other power companies do.
_ ldaho Power should invest in more renewable energy and divest from fossil fuels.
_ ldaho Power should reimburse the cost of a home owner's solar system because they
reduce the need for more infrastructure (power lines, power plants, etc.).
Additional Message to ldaho Public Utilities Commission:
Signed Date: €ltalt-lt'l
Your Name:
Address:
City:State:\b Zip 8=s.4
Email:
I acknowledge thot submitting o comment in on open case constituent a public record under ldoho Code 74-
101 (13) and oll information provided by me on the is form is avoiloble for public ond medio inspection. My
comment may be reviewed by the utility.
U
01^*c M-\fa,^s,".
t"
Cost lncrease Proposed by ldaho Power for Customers with Solar or Wind Turbines
i
Citizen Comment to the ldaho Public Utilities Commission
P O Box 83770 Boise, ldaho 83720-0074; FAX: [phone] . )
Case Number: IPC-E-17-13
My power company is f,(^f,, l aLJc-l-
lwant ldaho Public Utilities Commission to know:
)S *.nt to keep solar and wind power affordable in ldaho.
_ I may want to put solar power on my property in the future.
-
I Iike solar & wind power because they will bring thousands of jobs to ldaho.
-
I would like to see #ffi" incentive program for installation of solar and/or wind. .
XAafto Power should continue to pay for power generated by customers; keep
Schedule 84 that provides net metering.
LN
)gA.ho Power should embrace solar power because it reduces the need for power during.r-
the day when air conditioners are running the most.
-
ldaho should work with their customers to develop strategies to encourage distributed
generation, as other power companies do.
XA.no Power should invest in more renewable energy and divest from fossilfuels.
_ ldaho Power should reimburse the cost of a home owner's solar system because they
reduce the need for more infrastructure (power lines, power plants, etc.).
Additional Message to ldaho Public Utilities Commission:
h/h^l [) , o/4*ooSignedDate
Your Name:LJ O Gnn
Address:1 < ; 0 ff. rra* Dr ),...-
City:?".&:Q,State:J_D Zip:832-o 1
Email:
I acknowledge thot submitting d comment in on open case constituent o pubtic record under t)aho Code Zq-
101 (13) ond oll information provided by me on the is form is available for public and medio inspection. My
comment may be reviewed by the utility.
c (r 14"!;