20180312Comments (3).pdf

Diane Holt
From:[e-mail]
Sent:Friday,March 9,2018 9:04 PM
To:BeverlyBarker;Diane Holt;Matthew Evans
Subject:Case Comment Form:Jeff Fereday
Name:Jeff Fereday
Case Number:IPC-E-17-13
Email:[e-mail]
Telephone:[phone]
Address:420 E.Crestline Dr.
Boise Idaho,83702
Name of Utility Company:Idaho Power Company
Comment:I ask that the Public Utilities Commission deny IPCo's request to create new customer classes for Residential
and Small General Service net metering customers.
My wife and I,residing at 420 E.Crestline Drive,Boise,ID 83702,are customers of Idaho Power Company
("IPCo"or the "Company").In October 2016,at a net cost of approximately $11,000 (after tax credits and deductions),
we insfalled a 4.83 kilowatt photo-voltaic system on our roof,togetherwith an inverter,a net meter and other
equipment complying with IPCo's specifications.In 2017 our solar system produced 54%of the electricity we consumed.
We earned net metering credits from the Company-by providing more power to the grid than we received in a given
month-of 6 KWh in April and 176 KWh in May,2017,for a total credit of 182 KWh for the year.Thus,we remain net
users of IPCo-suppliedelectricity and in 2017 produced credits totalingtwo percent of our total usage of 12,220 KWh.
We are not supplying energy to the grid on a net basis.It appears that the minor accounting entry-accountingfor a
small credit in two months-is the only thing that distinguishes us from those IPCo customers who do not have net
meters.
IPCo has offered no rationale for separating net metering customers into their own class,much less imposing
additional chargeson them.According to the Company's figures,"an average net metering customer is 26 percent less
expensiveto serve than an average standard service residential customer."Direct Testimony of Stacy Donohue,Case No.
IPC-E-17-13 (December 22,2017)("Donohue"),pp.4-5,citing IPCo (Aschenbrenner direct testimony,Ex.10,p.11).
According to Donohue,"[n]et metering lowers costs to serve because it reduces capacity and energy costs the Company
would otherwise incur to serve that load."Donohue,p.5.Aside from the illogic of IPCo's proposal,the Company has
conducted no cost of service study to justify separating net metered customers into a separate class,and this alone
should disqualify the proposal.The Commissionshould deny the current request.It is premature without a cost of
service study,and it appears the Companycould not substantiate it even if such a study were conducted.
The Commission should direct the Company to investigate and report back on how it can become a partner in
promoting rooftop solar,and in pursuing more community solar projects.The Commission should enter rulings that
encourage this.IPCo's present proposal goes the opposite direction.
Unique Identifier:24.117.130.247
1
Diane Holt
From:[e-mail]
Sent:Friday,March 9,2018 10:57 PM
To:BeverlyBarker Diane Holt;Matthew EvansSubject:Case Comment Form:Kurt Nelson
Name:Kurt Nelson
Case Number:FN'&
Email:[e-mail]
Telephone:
Address:1630 Heroic Rd
Hailey Idaho,83333
Name of Utility Company:Idaho Power
Comment:Idaho should be growing clean energy options to reduce our reliance on out-of-state fossil fuels.The netmeteringprogramistheonlymeansforindividualIdahoanstoinvestmoneyintheirownlocallygeneratedcleanenergy.
The Idaho PUC staff looked at Idaho Powersdocuments and found no reason to segregate solar customers.Instead,I askthePUCtodirectIdahoPowertoconsiderthefullrangeofcostsandbenefitsthatarisewhencustomersavoidutilitypowerandmeettheirownneedswithlocalcleanenergy.
Because I cant choose my utility,I rely on the PUC to ensure fair programs.Please maintain the current net meteringprogram.
Unique Identifier:54.152.158.3
1
Diane Holt
From:[e-mail]
Sent:Saturday,March 10,2018 12:31 AM
To:BeverlyBarker;Diane Holt;Matthew Evans
Subject:Case Comment Form:bette Carlson
Name:bette Carlson
Case Number:IPC-E-17-13
Email:[e-mail]
Telephone:[phone]
Address:2815 Woody Drive
Boise ID,83703
Name of UtilityCompany:.
Comment:The Commission work to keep solar affordable,encourage innovation and increased access to solar and windenergy;protect consumers'right to install solar panelswithout unfair charges or fees;and deny Idaho Power's requestforanewnetmeteringcustomerclass.
Solar energy is a significant economic resource as part of the renewables domination over power.Solar will account for
64 percent of the new generating capacity.The cost of solar will come down.(resilient cities)The key growth in renewables is expected to be rooftop solar which provides opportunities for consumers and adistributedpowerframework.It is likely to lead to a revival of economic activity in those places which can enable it.(Resilient Cities)Solar power is here.Even in Idaho where hydropower plays a role in keeping our costs down.However hydropower is based on a natural resource and subject to natural changesand disasters.Solar is moreeconomicalandlessvulnerblethancentralizeddistribution.Ultimately the Commission's decision is to support thestatusquoorfacilitateIdaho's opportunityto join other geographic areas nationally and internationallyin capitalizing onthisneweconomy.
Unique Identifier:160.3.198.19
1