20180309Comments (10).pdf

Public Comment on IDAHO POWER-NEW SCHEDULES FOR CUSTOMERS WITH ON-
SITE GENERATION: IPC-E-L7 -13
Submitted by:
Chad Worth
Garden City,ID
My name is Chad Worth of Garden City, Idaho. I volunteer on the Board of Directors of the
Snake River Alliance. I work as an engineer for a consulting firm focusing on energy
efficienry and distributed energy resources. I have also previously worked for a small
independent solar installer. The following comments represent my own personal
comments, and are not the view or opinion of the Snake River Alliance.
ln 20LG and20l7,l helped the Snake River Alliance start and operate the Solarize the
Valley program to educate people about rooftop solar and increase the amount of clean
energy being generated in ldaho. The program was very successful with over 110 families
installing solar panels with a total capacity of over 760 kW all across Southwest Idaho. I
know firsthand that these net enerry metering (NEMJ customers (& those who are not
NEM customers) have significant concerns about the future of ldaho Power's NEM
program.
I urge the Commission to consider the following comments regarding ldaho Power's (the
Company) application for New Schedules for Customers with On-Site Generation (lPC-E-
77-13).
l. The Commission should work to protect customer choice for all electric
ratepayers in ldaho.
The people of Idaho grant the Company and our state's other investor-owned utilities a
natural monopoly in exchange for providing reliable,low-cost power, and to the Company's
credit, they do a good job keeping the lights on at a reasonable cost. However, the state of
Idaho has not de-regulated its utilities, like many other states. Electric customers in ldaho
don't have a choice of who their power provider is, as one would for example in Texas.
Maintaining customer choice in any market drives competition and leads to an overall
more efficient market place. The NEM program is the only real choice the Company's
customers have. I strongly encourage the Commission to protect this choice.
2. The Commission should reject the Company's request for a new rate class for
residential and small general service (R&SGS) customers with on-site
generation as it is not warranted and sets a dangerous precedent for rate class
development and rate making.
R&SGS customers throughout the Company's service territory are inherently diverse as far
as peak demand, seasonal & diurnal loads, and overall annual energy consumption.
However, R&SGS customers with on-site generation are only one small group of residential
customers whose energy use characteristics are different than others and who may have
different costs of service. Cost of service varies extensively between rural and urban
customers, custorners with electric or gas heating, customers with air conditioning or no
air conditioning, apartment dwellers and single-family homeowners, etc. Using the
Company's logic, it may be more equitable to use these various residential customer
atffibutes to develop numerous new rate classes. However, because this is unlikely to
happen, to single-out customers with on-site generation is arbitrary. Not only has the
Company not demonstrated that there is a problem in need of a solution through a cost-
benefit study, it also does not appear the Company has considered a myriad of other
regulatory approaches. Many other states in the Pacific Northwest and Intermountain West
regions have addressed concerns regarding rooftop solar.compensation without creating
new rate classes. I believe ldaho can do the same in a responsible manner.
3. The state of Idaho has one of the lowest adoption rates of on-site solar
generation in the region and the Company's proposal creates significant
uncertainty into a very nascent solar market
As shown below in Figure 1, Idaho has one of the lowest solar adoption rates in the region.
For example, as of December 30,2017, according to data from the Energy Information
Administration (EIA), state-wide Idaho has about 1 residential solar installation per
thousand persons, far less than neighboring Utah and Nevada who have roughly 9
residential solar installations per thousand persons. It is worth noting that both states have
implemented NEM reforms that do not create a new rate class. Even if the residentialsolar
market were to grow five-fold in ldaho, the saturation would still be less than many
neighboring states.
Residential Solar Net Metering lnstalled Systems per 1000 Persons
10
Pqo-b8CLo7oodb
E,(Ui4
a;3oEz
U'zr
o I t,, i:I
WY ID MT WA OR NV UT
Solar Capadty as o, Drc 3r" 2017 per EIA€61M d.t6: htFs/rtffirlaAor/.lccrrtcty/dab/ela$rrvlndelhtml
Popuhtlon Drtr: U.S. Ccns6 gureu. 2016Estlm.t!: hrtF//w2.enscgov/pogruHrEyrpopcat^ltLs/201o2o1fln!r!/t tdrnst€UoltuLdu
Figure L: Solar adoption rates in ldaho's neighboring states
Even with modest growth in recent years, there are significant barriers to rapid expansion
of solar in ldaho. For example, in ldaho, there is no mechanism for power purchase
agreements, which have been very significant drivers for rapid solar growth in other states.
Customers in Idaho must use local loans, home equity loans or cash to pay for their
installations. I strongly believe the Company's proposal is pre-mature and will significantly
dampen public interest towards achieving enerely independence and resiliency using clean
energ5/ in ldaho.
4, The company's proposal would discriminate against customers who have iust
one solar panel.
Most of the families who participated in the Solarize the Valley program will not have "net
zero" homes and will always be customers of the Company, beyond their minimum
monthly service fee. Under the Company's proposal, if a customer chose to install even one
solar panel they would fall into a new class of customers for whom future rates and fees are
unknown.
It is not appropriate to single out non-net zero solar customers unfairly for future rate
increases when customers that reduce their energy use in other ways do so without
penalty. Idaho Power frequently encourages and helps customers to conserve and reduce
eners/ use. In some houses, switching to all LED light bulbs or upgrading an air-
conditioner could have the same impact as adding a small solar system.
This situation is another reason the Commission should reject the Company's application
for a new rate class for R&SGS customers with on-site generation.
5. The Commission should facilitate a process to properlyvalue the costs and
benefits of distributed energy resources like on-site solar generation before
creating new rate classes or modifying the current NEM program.
I encourage the Commission to start a new collaborative process with advocates, the
Company, solar installers and others to develop a plan to allow solar and other customer
side generation to grow sustainably in the Company's service territory. As a first step this
group should oversee and provided input to a study to quantiff costs and benefits of R&SGS
customers with on-site generation. Then when this information is available and vetted, it
would be appropriate to discuss the merits of new rate designs, fees, value of exports, etc.
It is true that most all mature solar markets in the United States have eventually migrated
away from pure retail NEM and in time, it may be appropriate for the Company to do the
same. However, as shown above in Figure 1, the Company's saturation of residential
customers with on-site generation is still extremely small and will remain extremely small
relative to neighboring states even under robust growth projections. In other words, we
have time to address this issue in a collaborative manner and do not need to rush to
implement a solution without all the data available.
Many states and public utility commissions across the country have grappled with the same
concerns the Company has presented. Some states like Arizona and Utah have been
thoughtful with their NEM reforms which have allowed their solar markets td grow in a
sustainable manner. Other states such as Kansas have acted abruptly, siding with the
incumbent natural monopoly utilities in creating a new rate class which will likely
effectively eliminate a customer's choice to self-generate. In ldaho, we can do better and
work collaboratively to resolve our differences.
6. To reduce costs of administering the NEM program, the Commission should
explore requiring the Company to implement an online interconnection
process to replace the current paper-based interconnection application
system.
The Commission should consider requiring the Company to transition to an online
interconnection application processing system for NEM applications to reduce costs for
ratepayers and NEM participants. Mailing paper NEM applications is both burdensome for
applicants and utility NEM program managers. In recent years dozens of utilities across the
country have implemented online interconnection applications to reduce application
processing time, errors and to easily communicate the status of applications to the
applicants.
APPLIGAITO"
PRG[3IT'5'D V
Hil LO!'G I? TAI(EI UTILITEs TO PROCEI' AT
IrTEnCOXXICTIC| APPLICTTTOT (Of,.rf,l U!3 r^f,r U V
8e!t
Ialt
'1 ,
iluE
-
-
20 40 50 80 t00
f !1i?,',i1.
i 2TO 4 wEtKs
il rff?E,li^-
'Ilir irlogregtrc n be*d
m d.la frsr rarliticr
irltatcrla<trog al b-t
SO0DGrclrrogy
rntamr t[ y.r.
olrultt
TAXUAL
TAU,TL 0
F'igure 2:.ttafistics Comporing Manual vs. Online lnterconnection Applicotions
Source: hftps://www.nrel.gov/dgic/interconnection-insights-2017-10.htrn1
A recent case study by National Renewable Energy Labs INREL) explores the different
technology options and the benefits realized by switching to online interconnection
platforms.
DPV (distributed photovoltaics) and other distributed energy resources (DERs) add
complexity to the electric arid and con result in positive or negative impacts depending
on various factors, such as the project's location and locol distribution system
characteristics. Thorough interconnection processes ensure that these additions to the
grid have no negative safety, reliability, or power-quality impacts.lnterconnection
review and opproval processes ore crucial to the continued stability of the grid, but are
also ripe for improvement in mony areas of the country... Streamlining and improving
interconnection processes can benefit all parties by reducing the financial and time
commitments involved.
Improving lnterconnedion Processes with Online Applicotion Processing Systems
Source: https://wwwnrel.gov/dgic/interconnection-insights-2017-10.htrnl
There are numerous approaches different utilities have taken from developing their own
in-house application processing systems to off-the-shelf software solutions. However, while
each utility's needs are different, the benefits to an online interconnection platform will
only increase as the number of customers with on-site generation grows. I encourage the
Commission and the Company to consider implementing these best practices now which
will provide near and long-term benefits to ratepayers, the Company and customers with
on-site generation.
I thank the Commission for the opportunity to be involved in this process and encourage
the Commission to carefully consider the comments outlined in this letter.
Sincerely,
Chad Worth
Garden City,lD
Diane Holt
From:
Sent:
To:
[e-mail]
Friday, March 9,2018 4:28 PM
Beverly Barker; Diane Holt; Matthew Evans
Case Comment Form:Jake MacArthurSubject:
Name: Jake MacArthur
Case Number: lPC-E-17-13
Ema il: jake.maca rth [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 1209 N 24th St
Boise lD, 83702
Name of Utility Company: ldaho Power
Comment: lam not a net-metering customer
I oppose ldaho Power's position. ldaho Power's conclusion that net-metering customers add financial burden to other
customers is flawed and short-sighted. ldaho Power has failed to account for the positive externalities of solar power
generation, such as clean, distributed and local energy generation. ln addition, solar energy represents an opportunity
for ldaho Power to decommission salmon killing dams, which would actually save the utility dollars, revive livelihoods
and comply with the law.
ldaho Power is cherry picking - they have ignored that other customers disproportionately benefit from their service. For
example, a cabin customer connected to ldaho Power incurs far more cost than a user in Boise, but they pay the same
rates. ldaho Power has to provide the connection and service it in remote regions. Should these customers pay more?
Fundamentally, ldaho Power is following the lead of other utilities and listening to lobbying groups, such as Americans
For Prosperity, the Edison Electric lnstitute and the American Legislative Exchange Council. These groups aim to prop up
the fossil fuel industry and squash solar. They are not actually interested in this bogus environnientaljustice claim that
ldaho Power is peddling.
Please stop this nonsense and reject ldaho Power. Sincerely, Jake MacArthur, Boise, lD
Unique ldentifier: 209.253.39.250
1
Diane Holt
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Name: Alyson Mqrtin
Case Numbe r: IPC-E-LT -13
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: 208/,843241
Address: 37L6E. Timbersaw Dr
Boise ldaho,83716
Name of Utility Company: Doing What We Can.org
Comment: ln 2OL4l bought my current home in Harris Ranch, Boise,ldaho. My home is an energy-efficient home with a
high Energy Star rating. Despite my low electric use in my home, because I am extremely concerned about climate
change and its adverse effects on the livability of the Earth,l solarized my home and have been a net-metering
participant since July of 2OL6.l have read that ldaho Power believes solarizers are not paying our fair share for the grid,
which arguably amounts to approximately 555 a month. lf true, that would raise a glaring question in my case. Before I
solarized, I paid less than that per month. Under the scenario lP appears to be laying the groundwork for, I could end up
paying MORE after investing in solar than I did before. That is simply unfair!! I should not be penalized for solarizing,
which I did for the good of our community and Earth.
Come on lP. Let's plan for a livable future-together
Alyson R. Martin, J.D.
Founder: Doing What We Can/citizen climate action
3716 Timbersaw Dr.
Boise, ldaho 83716
Unique ldentifier: 7 L.37 .271.95
[e-mail]
Friday, March 9,2018 2:35 PM
Beverly Barker; Diane Holt; Matthew Evans
Case Comment Form:Alyson Martin
1
Diane Holt
From:
Sent:
To:
[e-mail]
Thursday, March 8, 2018 1 1:05 PM
Beverly Barker; Diane Holt; Matthew Evans
Case Comment Form: Robert VestalSubiect:
Name: Robert Vestal
Case Number: IPC-E-17-13
Ema il : [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 2021 N. Stoneview Place
Boise lD, 83702
Name of Utility Company: ldaho Power Company
Comment: As customers of ldaho Power for many years and recent owners of a rooftop solar panel installation, my wife
and I object strongly to the proposal by ldaho Power to reclassifo customers who generate their own power. At
considerable expense, we decided to instal! rooftop solar panels mainly for these reasons: (1) Reduce our consumption
of non-renewable sources of power from sources that are detrimental to our environment, particularly fossil fuels
(natural gas, coal). (2) Contribute to the national and worldwide effort to slow the rate of global warming. We believe
that public utilities, as well as our local, state, and national governments, should be incentivizing the use of solar and
wind energy rather than discouraging the use of these renewable energy sources. ldaho Power wants to a
compensation structure that very likely would be used to reduce the credit, currently at the full retail rate, that results
from solar generated power returned to the grid via net metering. This would be a disincentive to install rooftop solar.
We attended the hearing in Boise on March 1 and heard many well considered and persuasive reasons to reject the
ldaho Power proposal. There was no support for the proposal. We also read the summaries of testimony from PUC
staff, which also do not support the proposal. There is broad agreement that no change in the customer classes without
a comprehensive analysis of the rationale, cost/benefit, and potential adverse consequences of the proposal. The entire
process should be transparent. The burden of proof is on ldaho Power to demonstrate the adverse effects of net
metering and the absence of ways to mitigate those effects. ln fact, in my opinion this kind of analysis will show that
wider use of solar energy actually will reduce the demand for conventional non-renewable energy and thus will reduce
overall costs incurred by ldaho Power.
We respectfully urge the Commission to reject this proposal by ldaho Power and to take whatever actions possible to
encourage the use of rooftop solar.
Sincerely,
Robert E. Vestal
U niq ue ldentifi er: 24.117 .L28.2L7
1
Diane Holt
From:
Sent:
To:
[e-mail]
Thursday, March 8,2018 10:25 PM
Beverly Barker; Diane Holt; Matthew Evans
Case Comment Form: Kris GrimshawSubject:
Name: Kris Grimshaw
Case Number: Case# IPCE-17-13 83201)
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone:[phone]
Address: PO Box 725
Boise !D,83701
Unique ldentifier: 96.18. 160.213
1
Name of Utility Company: ldaho Power
Comment: I attended the public hearing in Boise, ldaho on March 1. There was an overwhelmingly large crowd in
attendance and many of whom provided comment and testimony. Unfortunately, I was not able to get into the meeting
room and spent the time in the foyer listening to the meeting on speaker provided by the PUC, thank you.
I would like to go on record, in writing, that I oppose the plan presented by ldaho Power to further add fees to current
and future solar customers. Solar customers have invested large sums of personal dollars to install cutting edge
technology on their homes. ln doing so the energy they generate through solar panels is used to power their homes,
any energy they do not use goes into the grid, creating a viable energy source for ldaho Power to use and sell to other
customers. These solar customers do NOT receive monetary compensation for the power they generate but do not use,
rather they are given a credit on their bill, ONCE ANNUALLY, to use against any non-solar energy they may consume.
ldaho Power assesses minimum fees to be connected to their grid to all customers even if they do not use any ldaho
Power generated energy. Solar customers should not be assessed or fined additional fees to continue their use of Solar
energy and additional clean, renewable energy sources.
It is the 21st Century, we are living in a new era of readily available clean and renewable energy sources. They should be
made easier to access, more readily available and encouraged through additional credits. They should not be made
more difficult to access.
Please do not support the ldaho Power's request to create a new classification for customers who install onsite
generation (solar, wind) and interconnect to ldaho Powe/s system. lt is my understanding that at this time ldaho Power
is not proposing to change the rates for these onsite generation
customers. However, I must take pause at ldaho Power's long term goal where they may request to change rates for
these onsite generation customers in the future. I believe the PUC's approval at this time would open the door for
ldaho Power to change rates for onsite generation customers in the future, something that I strongly oppose.
Diane Holt
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Name: Courtney White
Case Number: IPC-E-17-13
Ema il : whiteofboiseorders@gma il.com
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 1518 Knights Drive
Boise IDAHO,837tz
Name of Utility Company: ldaho Power
Comment: ln my problem-solving profession, there's a principle many of us quote: attack the problem, not the people. I
would like to thank the PUC Staff for embodying that spirit. Staff took the approach of clarifying the issue, proposing a
solution that targets the issue, and suggesting a venue through which other options could be evaluated. I agree with
Staff s philosophy that the Company should not concern itself with what happens on the custome/s side of the meter. I
believe residential customers should have the same rates for what we download, and receive fair value for power we
may or may not upload. While I have concerns with some specifics in Staffs proposal, that reinforces why I appreciate
their approach: Staff proposed something specific enough that the process of evaluating the solution could even begin.
ldaho Power is asking for permission to discriminate. ldaho Power targets people with on-site generation and selects
usage data to justify segregating them, regardless of whether they export or not. I would suggest this: if there's a
problem with a certain usage pattern, align the rate structure for everyone. The Company has not shown that a
separate rate class is necessary to address issues related to customers' usage patterns.
l'd particularly like to point out an issue that has not been fully addressed... A unique aspect of the proposed new classes
is the mobility between classes: A net metering customer with a small system might turn off her system if the new rates
were very unfavorable, or a standard customer with very high power bills might benefit from the new net metering rate
schedule and could join that class with a minimum investment in on-site generation. Also, there has been minimal
discussion of differences across wind, hydro, and solar net metering customers.
ldaho Power has stressed that problems with the current rate design help inform the evaluation of the new classes, and
yet problems with the new rate design should be excluded from consideration. The Company describes the separate
rate classes as a "first step" toward changing rate design; this first step solves no problems, the Company asks the
Commission to assume that future steps will address the problems they assert. The Commission and stakeholders
deserve the opportunity to evaluate solutions before approving this multi-step process. Every rate design is imperfect.
The Commission has not been given sufficient analysis to weigh the imperfections of the current rate design relative to
the imperfections of a rate design that relies on separate classes.
Here's one way to test for fairness: lf a new rate design were fair and non-discriminatqry, then theoretically a person on
the very edge - a person generating 1 kwh per year of power - would have the same bill under either standard class or
the new class. With separate rate classes, that would not happen.
I appreciate the PUC's thoughtful consideration and encourage the Commission to decline ldaho Power's request for
new rate classes.
[e-mail]
Thursday, March 8, 2018 9:11 PM
Beverly Barker; Diane Holt; Matthew Evans
Case Comment Form: Courtney White
1
Unique ldentifier: 159.118.92.8
Diane Holt
From:
Sent:
To:
[e-mail]
Thursday, March 8, 2018 7:25 PM
Beverly Barker; Diane Holt; Matthew Evans
Case Comment Form:Walter ThodeSubject:
Name: Walter Thode
Case Number: IPC-E-L7-L3 83201
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address:4315 N Johns Landing Way
Boise |D,83703
Name of Utility Company: ldaho Power Co.
Comment: ldaho Power wants to change the current net metering pricing structure, but hasn't conducted a cost-benefit
analysis on how this would affect those with rooftop solar. lndependent analyses indicate that everyone benefits from
net metering.
Rooftop solar is booming, bringing benefits to the area. lt's a clean power alternative that should be encouraged, not
penalized.
Uniq ue ldentifier: 63.155.35.L7 4
1
Diane Holt
From:
Sent:
To:
[e-mail]
Thursday, March 8,2018 4:30 PM
Beverly Barker; Diane Holt; Matthew Evans
Case Comment Form: Bert BowlerSubject:
Name: Bert Bowler
Case Number: IPC-E-17-13
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 1990 Stone Ridge Way
Boise ldaho,837L2
Name of Utility Company: ldaho Power Company
Comment: I have been net metering for almost four years. I have a 3.0 kW system that is oriented in a southwesterly
direction. During July and August between the hours of 4:00 & 7:00 pm my panels peak in production which coincides
with IPC's peak electricity needs. I view my rooftop solar system as contributing to the solution rather than the problem
related to climate change.
IPC needs to treat rooftop solar via net metering as an asset rather than a costly liability that it is not. IPC should actively
promote rooftop solar - it is in the company's interest.
I am opposed to IPC's proposal creating a new customer class for residential and small general service customers
utilizing rooftop solar.
Unique ldentifier: 159.118.94.233
1
Diane Holt
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
[e-mail]
Friday, March 9,2018 2:26PM
Beverly Barker; Diane Holt; Matthew Evans
Case Comment Form: Bryan Bond
Name: Bryan Bond
Case Number: IPC-E-17-13
Email: bryandbond @gmail.com
Te le pho ne : 2O8-5L3-O7 57
Address: 2283 N Sunrise Ave
Boise ldaho ,837t9
Name of Utility Cbmpany: ldaho Power
Comment: Bryan Bond
2304 N Sunrise Ave
Boise, lD 83713
ldaho Public Utilities Commission
Attn: Paul Kjellander, Commissioner
P O Box 83720
Boise, ldaho 83720-0o74
Dear Mr. Kjellander,
I am writing you today to discuss the matter of net metering. Specifically as it applies to ldaho Power and their
proposal to categorize customers with grid tied solar power systems in a classification separate than that of regular
customers with no alternative energy sources. This is an attack on innovation and would inhibit advancement of
distributed and clean energy systems in our state. Do you support your fellow ldahoans in their pursuit of sustainable
resources and a lower cost of living? lt is my opinion that this proposed change on net metering should make it no
further than the ldaho Public Utilities Commission in order to protect the future of energy independence for the
residents of our beautiful state.
I am a born and raised ldahoan and the future of this state is something I hold very dear to me. I have been
living here for thirty-one years and have no plans of leaving. This is also where I choose to raise my son, making issues
like this even more important to me. I enjoy a lot of outdoor activities such as camping, hiking, fishing, bicycling and
spending time in the beautiful parks our city has to offer. I would like to get my son into these same activities and have
hopes that he himself can raise children in this city in the future. I am also a homeowner in this city, one that has an all
electric house. Even without a mortgage on the property the electric bill in the winter on electric only houses is
ridiculously high. I would love to be able to lower my cost of living as would many residents of our beautiful city.
I am writing to you specifically, Mr. Kjellander, because of your involvement not only with the ldaho Public
Utilities Commission but your involvement with the state Office of Energy Resources among others. You have quite the
background in energy resources and I believe that you can be a great influence in this matter that may allow the citizens
of ldaho's voices to be heard in the matter. You have a long standing history of representing ldahoans in all sorts of
matters. Please assist us in having our voices heard in this current matter.
1
Clean energy solutions are extremely important to the future of our state. Helping to increase the quality of the
air we breathe. The cleaner our air is the more active the population will be, this will encourage more athletic activities
and would result in better health for our children and loved ones. The more active we are outside, the more often we
come together as a community in public places. This will result in a stronger sense of community and only help to better
us as a whole as ldahoans. Please encourage the advancement of clean air initiatives in our state by collaborating with
organizations like the Snake River Alliance who are striving to increase our quality of living and lower our cost of living in
our home state.
Founded in 1979, the Snake River Alliance was formed to put an end to the misuse of nuclear waste in order to
make ldaho a more livable place for all it's residents. Through the years they have striven to educate ldahoans of the
dangers of nuclear power plants, nuclear weapons production and nuclear contamination to our environment. Now they
are trying to help people gain access to clean renewable sources of energy such as solar power. They have been involved
in stopping nuclear projects such as blocking the construction of the Special lsotope Separator that was being designed
in order to manufacture weapons-grade plutonium. This organization has been fighting for the good of ldahoans since it
was first founded. Please do consider their stance on this current issue as it is a very well informed opinion they hold.
Distributed, clean energy solutions would give ldaho residents the ability to reduce the cost of living, allowing us
to live more active and enjoyable lifestyles. I myself live in an all electric home. The ability to add solar panels to my
house would allow me much more freedom in my budget to spend elsewhere across Boise and in our wonderful state.
This would allow for local businesses to thrive as well. However, if ldaho Power is allowed to categorize those with solar
solutions attached to their house then the benefits of the system dwindle and it would become just another expensive
way to obtain energy. Thls will not benefit the residents of ldaho to classify people generating power in a class of their
own, all it will do is make it easy for ldaho Power to increase the rates of those seeking energy independence. Please do
not take sides with the ldaho Power proposal and close off yet another avenue us ldahoans have to secure ourselves a
more sustainable future.
Cleaner air equals better health. Better health equals a happier and more robust population. Healthier people
equal lower medical expenses. The less money people are spending on medical bills the more money they have to
circulate through our local economy and locally owned businesses. Please help ldaho by giving small businesses a better
chance at thriving. Another reason solar energy would be helpful to small businesses is the fact that by running their
own solar energy systems they would have lower overhead and operating costs. This allows business owners to invest
more in expanding their businesses rather than wasting unnecessary amounts of money on electricity solutions.
ldaho needs innovative companies to spur economic growth. lf we are closed minded and do not support
innovations in clean energy and distributed energy systems then we are not only hindering the residents of ldaho, but
also local based companies such as the ldaho National Laboratory. They are doing groundbreaking work on the future of
battery storage systems. Currently battery storage is not up to par with our solar energy solutions, which is why we
desire to have grid tied systems to ensure that we have power available whenever it is needed. The Snake River Alliance
shares much responsibility for the research being done by the ldaho National Laboratory, while this is wonderful news,
the INL has also conducted a lot of research in the nuclear power and nuclear weapons fields. By hindering the
advancement of power storage research we run into an issue where they may be encouraged to focus more on the
nuclear sector again. This has many concerns included therein as the INL has in the past been responsible for nuclear
contamination of aquifers that supply a large portion of our population with their drinking water. Please encourage the
research they are currently conducting on power storage so that we may one day not have to rely on nuclear power
whatsoever. Wouldn't you prefer to live in a state that is setting records on the amount of renewable energy sources
deployed? Wouldn't you like ldaho to be a place where many future generations can live without worrying about
nuclear power plant failures or other contaminates that can cause cancer, birth defects and other horrible illnesses?
With the lack of customers already having solar solutions on their house then this power storage technology
that is being worked on would have much less practical use and may be delayed quite substantially. ln the past ldaho
has flourished because of our technological companies like Micron and Hewlett Packard. Battery storage could be
another huge industry that our state could be on the leading edge of. Do you really want play an active role in hindering
2
this possible technological breakthrough and keeping our economy from getting a much needed boost? Solar systems
combined with storage solutions have already reached a point to where they are competitive with coal energy solutions,
soon advancements will have it to a state of reliability that will make it competitive with gas as well. Wouldn't ldaho be
better off having a head start on this technology rather than being behind the curve?
I believe that ldaho has always been a wonderful place to live, with a good cost of living and many wonderful
outdoor attractions. I believe that keeping our utilities cost effective is one of the next steps in making ldaho an evbn
better place for us to live and enjoy our lives. ldaho Power takes a stance that people with solar panels are not paying
their share of energy costs here in the state. I believe that is a ludicrous statement. Even with the net metering program
in place, customers are only getting credit for excess energy they place into the grid. Other customers, that then utilize
this energy but do not have any solar panels themselves, are still paying the usual rate for that electricity. Keep in mind
this is electricity that ldaho Power did nothing to contribute to the grid. Charging customers who are adding to the grid a
higher rate for the electricity they pull from the grid is not only unfair, but it will hinder others from looking to the future
for energy independence. lt is already a costly matter to integrate solar panels onto our properties, being charged more
than the typical customer for power that we do need to pull from the grid would make this endeavor almost impossible
for most to afford. ldaho Power does not stand for the good of ldahoans with this proposal, but rather is standing for
themselves and their profit margins. They are looking for a way in which they can make more money off of a system that
already exists. Less than one percent of ldahoans have grid-tied solar panels, this is not even enough to make a
difference quite yet. Please do not hinder the advancement of energy solutions in our state. Please be on the side of
your constituents and allow us to seek a better future for us all here in our great state.
I am confident in your ability to represent your constituents in this urgent matter. You have served this state and
it's people for many years and I hope that you will for many years to come. Thank you for hearing my concerns on this
matter, I am sure you have received many peoples opinions regarding this matter and I am sure it is a bit overwhelming.
I look forward to seeing how the committee responds to ldaho Power in this matter and hope to see a decision that
supports a brighter future for us all as ldahoans.
Sincerely,
Bryan Bond
Unique ldentifier: 97 .L2L.23.t63
3