20171106Comment.pdf

From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
[e-mail]
Sunday, November 5,2017 5:41 PM
Beverly Barker; Diane Holt; Matthew Evans
Case Comment Form: Julia Page
Name: Julia Page
Case Number: IPC-E-17-13
Ema i I : jpage422@gma i l.com
Telephone:
Address:
Boise lD, 83702
Name of Utility Company: ldaho Power Company
Comment: We are opposed to this filing. We are net metering customers as of the spring of 2Ol7 and are pleased to be
producing our own electricity and contributing some to the grid. We are dismayed by ldaho Power Company's (lPC)
application for schedule changes. The application seems premature in the sense that the company has not sought to
quantify the costs and benefits of dispersed power generation and is taking action without that important analysis. IPC
seemingly places no value on distributed energy contributed to the grid and it seems to view rooftop solar as a burden.
Certainly this application for a new schedule, with unknown costs, will be chilling to, or will stop future rooftop solar
investments. lt will also put installers out of business.
We received a postcard from IPC early this summer explaining it was applying to change the rates. But don't worry, the
card implied, the change won't apply to existing net metering customers. I felt this was a blatant attempt to buy off
existing customers into not objecting to the application. Net metering customers should all be treated the same. My
read of the application is that existing customers willalso be subject to these new, unknown rates in the future. ln my
estimation, the postcard was misleading and/or deceptive. Unfortunately, I threw it away, so I only have my impression
to go by.
I feel that renewable energy, including dispersed rooftop generation, should be the future for energy production in years
to come. This application, if it moves forward, would take us in the opposite direction.
Unique ldentifier: 207 .87 .18L.L7 O
Diane Holt
1