20181203Comment.pdf

Diane Holt
From:
Sent:
To:
Subiect:
Matthew Evans
Monday, December 3,2018 2:42 PM
Diane Holt
Eisenhauer comments
Name: Phillip Eisenhauer AcaseNumbenliL 0 LV-19
Email: ike eisenhauer(omsn.cbm
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 3608 Foothill Blvd
Redding US,96001
Name of Utility Company: ldaho Power
Comment: Please see my letter dated February 18, 2018. I reside in ldaho for 5 months per year and have installed a
solar array in 2OL7 at 49 Parmenter Road Carmen ldaho 83462. All comments in that letter remain valid. Especially
want to encourage consideration of other compensation options for surplus energy credits. I endorse the "one meter
per year" concept but would like the flexibility to apply it to meters on properties that I own that are not contiguous to
the property with the array. I also would like to add another comment regarding the costs of recycling solar panels. The
estimated duration of solar panels are approx. 30 years unless damaged. A recycling tax should be added to the cost of
solar panels when purchased to ensure appropriate disposal. Thanks for the opportunity to comment!
Here is the letter from February 2018 hat Mr. Eisenhauer submitted as comment in !PC-E-17-13:
To: ldaho Public Utility Commission (PUC)
RECEIVED Date: February 18, 2018
Cc: ldaho Power Company
From: Phillip G. Eisenhauer
3608 Foothill Blvd. Redding,CA95001
Greetings,
Last summer, I installed a solar array on my property near Salmon, ldaho under the current Net Metering Service rules. I
have receive d the t2lL2/2OL7 ldaho Power (lP) letter that proposes to modify these rules and this letter contains my
comments.
I am so happy to have been able to install a solar system for my residence in Carmen Creek. lt has been a lifelong goal.
The site has a very sunny southerly exposure and is a perfect location to optimize solar power generation. Only time will
tell if my investment will pay me financial dividends but I know that by doing this it will contribute to reduced carbon
emissions for the Salmon River Valley. The valley has real air quality issues during the winter months especially during
times of temperature inversions. The more people that do this will result in cleaner air and lower carbon emissions. The
PUC should encourage this growing source of energy as much as it can while ensuring the power utilities are fairly
compensated for the use of their infrastructure to transmit this power.
I support ldaho Power's (lP) proposal to modify their service rate charges to compensate for the loss of revenues created
by the placement of solar power arrays that are tied into their grid. I trust that the PUC will establish fair rates when
doing so. However, I feel that the service costs should be allowed to be paid by energy credits created during the
calendar year. lP will still benefit by reduced future production costs as the solar power is added into the grid. The more
power that an individual array produces the less lP has to spend on developing additional sources as power demand will
certainly increase over time. Making the service costs available to be paid by credits would remove a small barrier when
1
people are considering whether to go with solar power. One of the reasons I installed my array was because I could
establish credits under this lP program and so I added panels to exceed the estimated use of my residence. Using the
credits to defray the service costs could help increase clean solar energy production.
Another comment that I feel would also encourage the development of solar power within the lP service area is allowing
energy credits to be applied to no more than one meter that is not contiguous to the property where the power is being
generated if it is the same rate. I own a rental house in Salmon and I would like to apply a credit to that meter and am
not clear why I shouldn't be able to do that. I certainly understand that we don't want people constructing large arrays
to pay for multiple dwellings' power use but limiting it to one meter at the same rate would prevent that.
Here is what the schedule states:
ii. The meter is locoted on, or contiguous to, the property on which the Designated Meter is locoted. For the purposes of
this toriff, contiguous property includes property that is seporoted from the Premises of the Designoted Meter by public
or roilroad rights of woy;
I read that to say that I can apply the credits to the meter on my barn, which is on the property with the array but not to
my rental in town. As long it is within the lP service area, at the same rate, and even in the same county I feel I should be
able to without affecting the goal of the current rules. lt would encourage domestic, clean energy production that could
cover the use of two residences.
Please consider these changes as you consider lP's Modification to Net Metering. Thankyou.
Sincerely, Phillip G. Eisenhauer
2