20180306Comments (15).pdf

Diane Holt
From:[e-mail]
Sent:Tuesday,March 6,2018 4:31 PM
To:Beverly Barker Diane Holt;Matthew Evans
Subject:Case Comment Form:Anna Clark
Name:Anna Clark
Case Number:
Email:[e-mail]
Telephone:[phone]
Address:P.O.Box 891
McCall ID,83638
Name of Utility Company:Idaho Power
Comment:I am against the proposal to create a separate classification for customers who install on-site power
generation and still connect to Idaho Power's system.(Net-Metering)
There have been no studies or proof that Net-Meteringis costing Idaho Power more money.
I recently installed a system at my home to generate power and have remain d on the grid.I spent $20,000.00 for this
system.That's $20,000.00 dollars Idaho Power doesn't have to spend on infrastructure.When I am not using this power,
Idaho Power can sell it to my neighbors and I get a credit (which is less than what they charge for electricity).If I use
more than I produce I have to pay full price for the power.
I also believe in this era of terrorist attacks,natural disasters,etc.it is wise to disperse production of critical services
such as electricity over a larger area to maintain service rather than have one sub-station fail and leave ten's of
thousands without power.
Thank you for your consideration.
Unique Identifier:50.37.209.58
1
Diane Holt
From:[e-mail]
Sent:Tuesday,March 6,2018 11:01 AM
To:BeverlyBarker;Diane Holt;Matthew Evans
Subject:Case Comment Form:Michale Lasher
Name:Michale Lasher
Case Number:IPC-E-17-13
Email:[e-mail]
Telephone:
Address:
Boise ID,83706
Name of Utility Company:Idaho Power
Comment:I formally ask the Idaho Public Utilities commission to deny Idaho Power's request to create a new customer
class for net metering customers.
While Idaho Power's request "does not call for changes to rates or chargesfor any customers,"the request for a new
customer class sets the stage for future rate change requests for this new class of customer.
We grant Idaho Power,as a public utility,a monopoly on the production and distribution of electricity that is intended to
benefit all its customers.Current and future net metering customers should not be penalized for installing renewable
energy systems,such as solar panels,by having to pay additional charges and fees.We all benefit from customers who
install and generate renewable energy systems.
"Idaho Power projects the number of net metering customers to grow to between 6,171and 7,032 by 2021."And what
percentage of growth does Idaho power expect for its standard electric service customers over the same period?As a
percentage of its overall customer base,the percentage of net metering customers MAY actually decline and the
revenue Idaho Power receivesfrom its new standard electric service customers MAY entirely offset the credits to its net
metering customers.Where is that data in the proposal?
We should encourage the use of renewable energy sources like wind and solar now for the benefit of future
generations.
Thank you for allowing me to comment on Idaho Power's request.
Unique Identifier:66.193.42.139
1
Diane Holt
Frorn:lonrstewart®yahoo.com
Sent:Tuesday,March 6,2018 10:14 AM
To:Beverly Barker;Diane Holt;Matthew Evans
Subject:Case Comment Form:Lon Stewart
Name:Lon Stewart
Case Number:IPC-E-17-13
Email:[e-mail]
Telephone:[phone]
Address:3477 Shadow Hills Drive
Eagle ID,83616
Name of Utility Company:Idaho Power
Comment:IPC-E-17-13
Idaho Power appears to have a double set of standards about the use of solar power.They publicly support solar power
with their own solar farms and as a solution to low energy at the end of a line system (Idaho Power's "Connections"
article February 2018)however they are not willing to support the individual with net metering.Why the double
standard?
If the general public is willing to install energy devices,solar panels,the equivalent of a super sized version of energy
efficiency,at their expense,why not let them?Adding distributed energy solar panels allows Idaho Power to increase
system capacity without building baseload or peakgenerating stations and transmission lines.Customer acquired
distributed energy is so much cheaper to add to the system compared to fixed units that Idaho Power should be willing
to pay the customers for adding generating capacity to the system.
The "Connections"newsletter gives tips on how to save energy,including Idaho Power sending LED light bulbs to
customers to save energy,but if a customer wants to go to the ultimate in savingsby generating their own power,Idaho
Power doesn't like it and wants to create more economic hardships to customers.Where is the justification in that?
Idaho Power has submitted two proposals for funds from the VW Mitigation Plan Projects Fund,one for charging
stations throughout the state and the other for the purchase of electric forklifts.This seems greedy.They are
requesting millions of dollars for company gain from a program they did not have any connection to,but are trying to
force their customers to pay extra fees to discourage distributed energy generation.Idaho Power should put their
customers first rather than grabbing at money that directly benefits the company.
As quoted from the "Connections"newsletter,"the Company is committed to a smart cost effective energy future."If
this is so,then they need to practice this philosophy and incorporate the technology of today by weaning ourselves off
the fossil fuels and use the clean renewable energy available to us.Customers are willing to help with the "cost effective
energy future",but not if they are being charged with higher fees.
A new rate class is inappropriate and should not be granted.
Thank you for your consideration.
Unique Identifier:75.174.158.144
Diane Holt
From:[e-mail]
Sent:Tuesday,March 6,2018 9:20 AM
To:BeverlyBarker;Diane Holt;Matthew Evans
Subject:Case Comment Form:Kevin Marsh
Name:KevinMarsh
Case Number:IPC-E-17-13
Email:[e-mail]
Telephone:
Address:452 S 6th Ave
Pocatello ID,83201
Name of Utility Company:Idaho Power
Comment:I ask that the PUC deny the Idaho Power request to end Schedule 84 net metering program and to create
separate customer classifications for those who generate electricity at home and those who do not.Idaho Power's
petition lists only generalizations and hypothetical costs to the company and to its customers;they have not provided
evidence that the costs of distributingsurplus power from residential producers exceeds the benefits to Idaho Power
from receiving that additional supply.The public interest in maintaining the existing support for distributed power
production opportunitiesoutweighs the company's interests in maximizing profits based on its traditional,20th-century
model of centralized production.Idaho Power should be more innovative in responding to the falling costs and rising
production of solar power generation.
The Public Utilities Commission was founded by the people of Idaho over a century ago to defend the public interest in
the accessibility and affordabilityof utility services provided by private firms who hold a monopoly on that service.
Distributed production from rooftop solar and other means promotes the accessibility and affordabilityfor electrical
service throughoutthe state without significantly harming the viabilityof any utilitycompany.Federal and state tax
laws,even in the wake of recent reforms,reflect that distributed electrical production is a public good that reduces costs
and promotes supply of power.To end net metering and to create separate rate classes for this purpose potentially
undermines that broadly recognized public good.
The request to mandate smart inverters does not require any change to net metering or customer classification.It is
inappropriate to include a simple technology update within this petition to change the fundamental structure that
promotes broader accessibility and affordabilityof electrical power in Idaho.
Thank you for your consideration of public comments in this case.
Sincerely,
Kevin Marsh
Pocatello
Unique Identifier:134.50.4.135
1
Diane Holt
From:[e-mail]
Sent:Tuesday,March 6,2018 8:44 AM
To:BeverlyBarker;Diane Holt;Matthew Evans
Subject:Case Comment Form:Thomas Ellestad
Name:Thomas EIIestad
Case Number:IPC-E-17-13
Email:[e-mail]
Telephone:[phone]
Address:3500 N SYCAMORE DR
Boise ID,83703
Name of Utility Company:Idaho Power
Comment:I am opposed to Idaho Powers proposal to segregate net-metered customers into different groups.Net-
metered customers have already undertaken a significant expense building peak-power generation capacity for ID
Power.Penalizing net-metered power producers by altering the 1:1 net metering rate is short sited.
Unique Identifier:209.210.32.194
1
Diane Holt
From:[e-mail]
Sent:Tuesday,March 6,2018 8:25 AM
To:BeverlyBarker;Diane Holt;Matthew Evans
Subject:Case Comment Form:Ryan Whitworth
Name:Ryan Whitworth
Case Number:IPC-E-17-13
Email:[e-mail]
Telephone:[phone]
Address:1624 South Von Elm St.Apt.#2
Pocatello Idaho,83201
Name of Utility Company:Idaho Power
Comment:Rooftop solar power is increasing in Idaho,bringing clean energy and jobs to Idaho communities.By charging
people more for their own solar power installations it could have the potentialof harming Idaho's economy.I believe a
cost-benefit analysis done by an independent party should be carefully considered.
Unique Identifier:134.50.65.200
1
Diane Holt
From:[e-mail]
Sent:Tuesday,March 6,2018 8:06 AM
To:BeverlyBarker;Diane Holt;Matthew Evans
Subject:Case Comment Form:Cathy Kriloff
Name:Cathy Kriloff
Case Number:IPC-E-17-13
Email:[e-mail]
Telephone:
Address:
Pocatello ID,83201
Name of Utility Company:Idaho Power
Comment:I support solar power in Idaho and oppose the plan to change the net metering policy or to raise rates for
users generating solar power.Solar power reduces pollution and the impacts of climate change and Idaho should
promote development of further solar resources.
Unique Identifier:174.27.66.164
1
Diane Holt
From:[e-mail]
Sent:Monday,March 5,2018 6:34 PM
To:BeverlyBarker;Diane Holt;Matthew Evans
Subject:Case Comment Form:Judy and Jeff Ruprecht
Name:Judy and Jeff Ruprecht
Case Number:¾PC -F-I 7 ~6
Email:[e-mail]
Telephone:[phone]
Address:841 Rim View Ln E
Twin Falls ID,83301
Name of Utility Company:Idaho Power
Comment:We urge Idaho Power to keep net metering for home solar installations as it is at present.We believe solar
production of electricity is the best for our planet.
Unique Identifier:174.19.119.178
1
Diane Holt
From:[e-mail]
Sent:Monday,March 5,2018 5:09 PM
To:BeverlyBarker;Diane Holt;Matthew Evans
Subject:Case Comment Form:Alida Bockino
Name:Alida Bockino
Case Number:IPC-E-17-13
Email:[e-mail]
Telephone:[phone]
Address:1104 Pine Crest Road
Moscow ID,83843
Name of Utility Company:Clearwater Power
Comment:I do not understand why Idaho Power believes that electric customers with solar,wind or micro-hydro are
not paying their fair share and why Idaho Power trying to put these customers into a separate rate class thus limiting the
number of customers who can use alternative,clean power sources.
Clean energy is the way to proceed.Solar and wind power reduce air pollutionwhich causes human illness,climate
change,higher rates for health care and air and water pollution.
Net metering will enable more homeowners to use alternative power sources.Instead of causing a problem,why can't
Idaho Power become part of the solution and get on board with solar power and net metering.
Let's try looking ahead for a change instead of keeping our heads in the sand.
Thank you.
Alida Bockino
Unique Identifier:64.126.175.57
Diane Holt
From:[e-mail]
Sent:Monday,March 5,20184:39 PM
To:BeverlyBarker;Diane Holt;Matthew Evans
Subject:Case Comment Form:Rachael Berman
Name:Rachael Berman
Case Number:IPC-E-17-13
Email:[e-mail]
Telephone:[phone]
Address:414 E.Schmeizer Lane
Boise ID,83706
Name of Utility Company:Idaho Power
Comment:If we get billed for line fees,somebody neutral needs to haveoversight as to how the fair number is
calculated.
Also -if we're going to get billed for line fees,we should be able to use our extra power credits to offset the fees.Or we
should get paid out for the extra power we put into the grid.
Also -if they're going to make everything "fair"they should use a schedule so that the power produced during the day is
valued appropriately compared to the (cheaper)power used at night.
Thankyou.
Unique Identifier:24.116.189.55
1
Diane Holt
From:[e-mail]
Sent:Monday,March 5,2018 6:30 PM
To:BeverlyBarker Diane Holt;Matthew Evans
Subject:Case Comment Form:Hillary Anderson
Name:Hillary Anderson
Case Number:IPC-E-17-13
Email:[e-mail]
Telephone:
Address:
Ketchum Idaho,83340
Name of UtilityCompany:Idaho Power
Comment:Please,please,please do not make it difficult for those doing the right thing by harnessing the sun,wind and
geothermal,by charging people money for doing what is right.Those that have made the step to help the environment
should not be punished,but rather rewarded.It takes a lot of money to invest in solar and that should suffice.Greed is
not good.
Thank You,
Hillary Anderson
Unique Identifier:68.105.212.224
1
Diane Holt
From:[e-mail]
Sent:Monday,March 5,2018 7:16 PM
To:BeverlyBarker Diane Holt;Matthew Evans
Subject:Case Comment Form:Richard A Rusnak Jr
Name:RichardA Rusnak Jr
Case Number:idc-e-17-13 83201
Email:[e-mail]
Telephone:[phone]
Address:2400 S Wildrye Way
Nampa Idaho,83686
Name of Utility Company:ID Power
Comment:I am opposed to the creation of a new rate class for home solar power customers.This proposal will
discriminate a tiny fraction of IDP customers.Justification,for this proposal,seems,to be based on maintenance of the
grid infrastructure,wherein it oddly does not recognize the vast difference in grid infrastructure between urban and
rural customers.This targets customers choice for self-security with rooftop generation of power.
Before IDP can justify such a harsh penalty against the tiny minority of its customers,the PUC should mandate a third
party derived cost-benefit analysis.Additionally,such measures will hurt hundreds of Idaho jobs,prolong reliance on
Mercury laden coal power pollutants that harm our young and old alike,not to mention adding toxins to rivers and
streams.I do not understand this companies reliance on 19th-century coal and at the same time stifling a technology
that will benefit the entire citizenry and economy in the long run I ask the PUC to stop the attempt by IDP to shift costs
to a tiny minority and address the benefits of rooftop solar on all ratepayers with a broad cost-benefit analysis.My
family wants to install solar on my Nampa home very soon,this is worrisome and I strongly oppose its passage.
Thank You for taking our comments.
Unique Identifier:174.27.95.119
1
Diane Holt
From:[e-mail]
Sent:Monday,March 5,2018 8:08 PM
To:BeverlyBarker;Diane Holt;Matthew Evans
Subject:Case Comment Form:Robert Vance
Name:Robert Vance
Case Number:IPC-E-17-13
Email:[e-mail]
Telephone:[phone]
Address:1001 N 15th St
Boise ID,83702
Name of Utility Company:Idaho Power Company
Comment:Idaho Power should not treat solar generators different than other rate payers.Every month I get a bill from
Idaho Power promoting conservation.This saves the company a lot of money.Solar energy by its own customers does
the same by avoiding the need for more generating and distributionfacilities.Plain old common sense tells us this.
Idaho Power should be looking at ways to promote solar generation,not less!They need to re-look at their economic
models.Thank you.
Unique Identifier:67.60.61.145
1
Diane Holt
From:[e-mail]
Sent:Monday,March 5,2018 9:34 PM
To:BeverlyBarker Diane Holt;Matthew Evans
Subject:Case Comment Form:Erin Rasmussen
Name:Erin Rasmussen
Case Number:IPC-E-17-1383201
Email:[e-mail]
Telephone:[phone]
Address:506 S 7th Ave
Pocatello Idaho,83201
Name of Utility Company:Idaho Power
Comment:Please deny Idaho Power Company's petitionto segregate customers who use alternative energy sources.
The reasons are as follows:1)Idaho Power has not completed a cost-benefit analysis of rooftop solar,which does not
put the PUC in a position to make informed judgments about cost-shifting.2)It will save jobs.Rooftop solar is increasing
in Idaho,bringing clean power and jobs to Idaho communities.3)Idaho Power's new rate class threatens Idaho's solar
industry and customers.
Please do the right thingfor southeast Idaho.
Unique Identifier:67.61.100.119
1
Diane Holt
From:[e-mail]
Sent:Tuesday,March 6,2018 7:24 AM
To:BeverlyBarker Diane Holt;Matthew Evans
Subject:Case Comment Form:Ernest Keeley
Name:Ernest Keeley
Case Number:IPC-E-17-13 83201
Email:[e-mail]
Telephone:
Address:5665 Arrowhead Dr
Pocatello Idaho,83204
Name of UtilityCompany:Idaho Power
Comment:Idaho Power should be encouraging the adoption of renewable energy at the local scale and should be
moving away from operations that block major waterways and impede fish passage on Idaho's rivers.Dividing customers
into different classes will discourage the develop of electrical production in local communities.
Unique Identifier:67.61.5.119
1