20220822Comments(7)_7.pdf

From:PUCWeb Notification
To:Jan Noriyuki
Subject:Notice: A comment was submitted to PUCWeb
Date:Saturday, August 20, 2022 7:00:14 AM
The following comments were submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Troy Riecke
Submission Time: Aug 19 2022 8:41PMEmail: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]Address: 5315 S Pegasus Way
Boise, ID 83716
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-22-22
Comment: "I support net metering without any other reduction. The customer should be credited at the same rate for their generation as they would pay to purchase the energy.
Otherwise, many customers will not invest in solar energy and Idaho Power will need to install their own solar power or other power generating methods. As our country shifts to electric
powered vehicles we will find the power grid will be unable to meet the power demand. I expect substantial grid investment will be necessary unless solar installations at individual
homes and businesses will help offset the power that must be distributed. I believe net metering will provide the incentive to residents to invest in solar installations and will in the
long run save the power company money. If necessary the power company could increase the standard monthly fee to cover their base costs for administration and maintenance of
distribution lines."
------
From:PUCWeb Notification
To:Jan Noriyuki
Subject:Notice: A comment was submitted to PUCWeb
Date:Saturday, August 20, 2022 2:00:06 PM
The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Tim Yoder
Submission Time: Aug 20 2022 1:14PMEmail: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]Address: 2700 N 30th St
Boise, ID 83703
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-22-22
Comment: "Dear Idaho Public Utility Commissioners, I’m writing to express my concerns with Idaho Power’s proposed changes to compensation for on-site power generation
customers. The proposed changes will drastically reduce any cost benefits of customer power generation, thereby discouraging any new installation. This comes at a time when we need
more, not less, zero carbon-emitting power generation, as demand in this region will only increase. I’m a bit concerned that Idaho Power was allowed to do its own study on this issue.
Why was a third-party, unbiased organization not employed to conduct this study? This appears like a certain conflict of interest. I do not see where this study considers that I have
paid for my own generation system and pay for its maintenance. I also pay for and maintain the infrastructure to support my generation system. All this at no cost to Idaho Power. With
enough customer generated power, Idaho Power can significantly scale back on increasing infrastructure, investing in new power generation and the environmental degradation those
ventures entail. These cost savings should be passed to consumers and power generators. This proposal by ID Power is certainly the antithesis of the Company’s own self-proclaimed goal of
clean, green energy production because it will certainly discourage any new roof top solar production. I hope the IPUC will conduct open hearings with opportunities for all who would
like to comment on this study. And at the very least, all those with generation systems in place at the time of IPUC’s decision need to be grandfathered into the current rate of net metering.
Thank you for your consideration, Tim Yoder "
------
From:Jessie Campbell ([e-mail]) Sent You a Personal Message
To:Jan Noriyuki
Subject:[EXTERNAL] IPC-E-22-22 Public Hearing Request
Date:Saturday, August 20, 2022 7:07:19 PM
CAUTION: This email originated outside the State of Idaho network. Verify links and attachments BEFORE you
click or open, even if you recognize and/or trust the sender. Contact your agency service desk with any concerns.
Dear Idaho Public Utilities Commission,
I am very concerned about Idaho Power's newly published cost-benefit study on rooftop solar. It underestimates the
value of solar by intentionally excluding measurable environmental and related benefits. This impacts customer
rates and threatens fair compensation for Idaho families, businesses, farms, schools, and other local entities that
benefit from locally-owned solar.
Please hold in-person public hearings in multiple locations across Idaho Power?s service territory (and offer virtual
video options and a weekend option) to ensure as many people as possible can participate in this critical proceeding
and share their concerns directly with the Commission.
After gaining an understanding of public concerns and the technical flaws in the study, I urge you to reject Idaho
Power's study. Idahoans deserve solar rates based on a more fair, credible, comprehensive, and complete analysis.
Sincerely,
Jessie Campbell
1205 Kamiaken St
Moscow, ID 83843
[e-mail]
[phone]
This message was sent by KnowWho, as a service provider, on behalf of an individual associated with Sierra Club.
If you need more information, please contact Lillian Miller at Sierra Club at [e-mail] or (415) 977-
5500.
From:PUCWeb Notification
To:Jan Noriyuki
Subject:Notice: A comment was submitted to PUCWeb
Date:Monday, August 22, 2022 7:00:14 AM
The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Nate Meier
Submission Time: Aug 22 2022 12:07AMEmail: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]Address: 5255 S Farmhouse Pl
Boise, ID 83716
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-22-22
Comment: "Idaho power should not be able to sell power generated by customer home solar without compensating the home generating it at a rate that is less than 80% of the market rate
charged. Rather than burn natural gas during peak nights, peak daylight generated power should move water back into the upper dams such that it can be released to turbines during
peak times or reduce the flow rate during sunny days. We have a unique 3 dam setup which makes it easy to USE this spare capacity to store during the day, then use during nights.
Cheaper than a chemical battery and green at the same time! Please do not change the laws to compensate solar home generation at less than you charge the neighbor next door without it! It
simply isn't fair. Last, remember utilities provide a service, they aren't a "for profit" enterprise. There is ZERO competition for Idaho power, and it still frustrates me that they are more or
less unregulated and can sell power from dams on Idaho soil to those states surrounding us, then go on to charge Idahoan's more because VP's at Idaho power got bonuses for making big
sales to out of state, then later needing to purchase power or build natural gas plants to compensate. With water needs being what they are, this is becoming more and more silly. We
need to step up and do what's right, not what makes Idaho Power Company more money!"
------
From:Kate Anderson ([e-mail]) Sent You a Personal Message
To:Jan Noriyuki
Subject:IPC-E-22-22 Public Hearing Request
Date:Monday, August 22, 2022 9:53:48 AM
CAUTION: This email originated outside the State of Idaho network. Verify links and attachments BEFORE you
click or open, even if you recognize and/or trust the sender. Contact your agency service desk with any concerns.
Dear Idaho Public Utilities Commission,
I am very concerned about Idaho Power's newly published cost-benefit study on rooftop solar. It underestimates the
value of solar by intentionally excluding measurable environmental and related benefits. This impacts customer
rates and threatens fair compensation for Idaho families, businesses, farms, schools, and other local entities that
benefit from locally-owned solar.
Please hold in-person public hearings in multiple locations across Idaho Power?s service territory (and offer virtual
video options and a weekend option) to ensure as many people as possible can participate in this critical proceeding
and share their concerns directly with the Commission.
After gaining an understanding of public concerns and the technical flaws in the study, I urge you to reject Idaho
Power's study. Idahoans deserve solar rates based on a more fair, credible, comprehensive, and complete analysis.
Sincerely,
Kate Anderson
855 Partridge Dr
Mountain Home, ID 83647
[e-mail]
[phone]
This message was sent by KnowWho, as a service provider, on behalf of an individual associated with Sierra Club.
If you need more information, please contact Lillian Miller at Sierra Club at [e-mail] or (415) 977-
5500.
From:John Yatchak
To:Jan Noriyuki
Subject:Case comments PUC-E-22-22
Date:Monday, August 22, 2022 9:54:16 AM
Attachments:PUC-E-22-22Comments.pdf
CAUTION: This email originated outside the State of Idaho network. Verify links and attachments BEFORE youclick or open, even if you recognize and/or trust the sender. Contact your agency service desk with anyconcerns.
PUC,
Attached are my comments to the Idaho Power net metering case/power study.

Thank You,

John Yatchak
[e-mail]
1119 S 2185W
Aberdeen ID 83210
208-844-0184

John Yatchak
1119 S 2185 W Aberdeen, ID 83210

Comments to IPC-E-22-22

I am an ex-electrical engineer with experience in the electrical power industry. I think Idaho
Power has done an excellent job of keeping Idaho’s electric rates affordable. I support the goal of
keeping electric rates as affordable as possible while maintaining system reliability. I currently have a
4.5kw solar PV system. I plan on adding capacity as needed. My PV system goal has been for net-zero
generation. Due to the proposed import/export credit changes to the net metering program my goal is
now changing to Net-Zero with minimum export to the utility. I expect to finance the changes required
to the system through the savings accrued by limiting the kwh export to the utility. My system changes
will include adding a grid-tie/grid-forming inverter along with sufficient battery storage for my needs.
These changes will allow me to minimize export to the utility, but will also provide both grid-down back
up and off-grid capability. I have no intent on selling any power to the utility.
The paradigm for electric generation/use has shifted. I characterize the current Idaho Power
utility system as a high cost investment and high cost operation/maintenance. Current and future
renewable PV systems have a much lower cost investment (/kwh) and low cost maintenance (with
mostly automatic operation). I plan on reducing my dependence on the utility grid to a minimum. The
first reason is cost; the second is complete energy independence from any external party. I now have
the means to produce almost 100% of my total energy requirements in a safe, effective, and low cost
manner. This includes space heating/cooling, transportation, and equipment/communications.
I have several advantages in what I am planning: 1) I can shift my load patterns; 2) I have the
knowledge/experience to reduce costs by performing the necessary work; 3) I have the knowledge to
design/manage the system I need. Here are several things that will happen in my system from due to
the reduction in the export credit:
1) I will move most electrical loads to the PV-day (daylight hours) through a combination of
timing of personal load use and programmed load timing (i.e. battery charging and electric vehicle
charging will be programmed to only occur during the PV-day).
2 ) Battery discharge will be done at night (without export) reducing my utility costs and grid
dependency.
3) I will use self-consumption to utilize as much PV generation as possible and minimize any use
of the grid.

There are several negative results from the reduction in net metering credit ratio:
1) The export credit changes will accelerate utility customer conversion to similar systems.
2) Fewer of these systems will be available to support the grid.
3) Since Idaho power has a daytime peak in the summer, it may increase the summer peaking
problem.
4) The proposed changes are adversarial in nature.

The solar systems cost analysis/payback/ROI discussion of the report is mis-leading at best. In
my case the installed DIY cost is roughly $1.25/watt and a total installed cost of ~$5.5K. My personal
cost was $0. This was due to use of various incentives including Tax credits, Tax rebates, and use of
direct Federal stimulus. This will continue in the next phase. With no direct cost to me in my current
system, the payback is 0 years and my ROI is very high.

Solar energy systems are progressing at a rapid rate. They are becoming more cost effective,
simpler to install, more automated and integrated. These trends will continue. In addition, the next
generation of batteries are beginning to be tested which will yield higher energy density, lower cost with
increased safety and longevity. The increased use of electrical vehicles will yield a significant side benefit
through Vehicle to Home (V2H) and Vehicle to Load (V2L) capability. The large batteries in these vehicles
will give many days of self-consumption/off-grid/grid-backup storage capability. Providing power needs
will be much simpler.

The following comments are in response to the proposed net metering change proposal and the Idaho
Power Study:
1. This applies to the group that only seeks to minimize net import/export (not to major
renewable energy producers)
2. There should not be any understanding of a monetary purchase/sale contract leading to
taxation reporting issues.
3. I can support a daily import/export accounting period of as it represents one daily solar
cycle.
4. I do not support an instantaneous import/export accounting period. I do not believe the
reports 4% difference between hourly and instantaneous accounting period. I think it might
be variable, and I have no visibility on my actual instantaneous usage through Idaho Power’s
website.
5. I will not argue on the specific import/export credit ratio. I think their calculation is
reasonable from Idaho Powers perspective. It is not reasonable from the customers
perspective. As I mentioned earlier, The lower the ratio the faster the transition away from
the grid.
6. I think the major issue here is how best to transition the utility to higher renewable energy
concentration. Idaho Power is doing the same transitions as the utility customers. Hopefully,
common interests could be found.

John Yatchak
Aberdeen. Id. 83210
From:PUCWeb Notification
To:Jan Noriyuki
Subject:Notice: A comment was submitted to PUCWeb
Date:Monday, August 22, 2022 11:00:11 AM
The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Claire Casey
Submission Time: Aug 22 2022 10:43AMEmail: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]Address: P. O. Box2112
Hailey, ID 83333
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: PUC-E-22-22
Comment: "I have a Solar Panel on my house. I have had the unit since appox. 2018-2019. I reject the Idaho Power Study and should be rejected as incomplete. It is my feeling that any
use of renewable energy by the pubiic is foreign to IP(Idaho Power). I am sure that it is depriving them of their regular funding. It is time that IP should embrace renewable energy
because of the growth of population in IP's region. Please make public hearings available to all in locations, at time when all people can attend to express our right to freedom of speech.
Thank you"
------