20230307Decision Memo.pdf

DECISION MEMORANDUM 1

DECISION MEMORANDUM

TO: COMMISSIONER ANDERSON
COMMISSIONER HAMMOND
COMMISSIONER LODGE
COMMISSION SECRETARY
COMMISSION STAFF
LEGAL

FROM: RILEY NEWTON, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL
JON KRUCK, CONSUMER ASSISTANCE

DATE: MARCH 7, 2023

SUBJECT: IN THE MATTER OF THAIN CASHMORE’S FORMAL COMPLAINT
AGAINST GINO ENDO COUNTY ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR AND
IDAHO POWER COMPANY; CASE NO. IPC-E-23-06.

BACKGROUND
On February 9, 2023, Thain Cashmore (“Complainant”), an Idaho Power Company
(“Company”) customer lodged a formal complaint (“Complaint”) with the Commission. In the
Complaint, Complainant disagreed with the Company’s refusal to recognize the grandfather status
of the Complainant’s solar array notwithstanding the fact that the Company “had proof that the
system was installed and paid for prior to 2020, meeting the requirement for grandfather status.”
Complaint at 1.
Before filing the Complaint, Complainant registered an informal complaint with the Idaho
Public Utilities Commission’s consumer assistance staff (“Staff”) regarding the same matter that
is subject of the Complaint. Staff could not informally resolve the dispute between Complainant
and the Company.
THE COMPLAINT
Commission Rule 22 “encourages the use of informal proceedings to settle or determine
cases.” IDAPA 31.01.01.022. See also IDAPA 31.01.01.054.05 (“[t]he Commission encourages
the use of informal proceeding (see Rules 21 through 26) to resolve or settle formal complaints.”)
“The Commission shall determine how a formal complaint should be processed, e.g., issuance of
a summons, open an investigation, informal procedure with Staff.” IDAPA 31.01.01.054.05.
Complainant alleges the following in the Complaint:
DECISION MEMORANDUM 2
1. Complainant asserts he requested an initial inspection of his solar array April/May
of 2020.
2. Complainant asserts that he agreed to the inspector’s request to move the inspection
date to October/November of 2020.
3. Complainant asserts that the “the inspector wasn’t feeling well” when the
October/November time came “and postponed . . . [the] . . . inspection until December.” Complaint
at 1.
4. Complainant states that, because the inspector was unable to make the inspection
until December 29, 2020, the paperwork was not completed by the grandfathering deadline of
12/20/2020.
5. Complainant asserts that the Company had proof the system was “installed and paid
for prior to 2020, meeting the requirement for grandfather status.” Id.
6. Complainant states that “[t]he only missing piece was the state inspection of the
system and having Idaho Power finish their end.” Id.
7. Complainant states that he lost his grandfather status “because of situations that are
beyond our control, the state inspector was overworked at the time and hampered by covid
restrictions and sickness.” Id. Complainant cites Idaho Code § 63-113, even though
acknowledging it is a tax provision, for the proposition that “extensions can be given under
strenuous times.” Id.
8. Complainant asserts that “everyone did their best at the time, in good faith, yet we
as home-owners have been wronged.” Id.
In conclusion, Complainant requests the Commission grant grandfather status to
Complainant’s solar array and allow the Company to finish its end of the connection process
thereby giving the whole system “the proper green light.” Id.
CONTROLLING LEGAL STANDARDS
The Complaint concerns the rule pronounced in Commission Order No. 34509 governing
grandfathering status for customers with on-site generation systems—i.e., net-metering rules.
Under this rule, if a customer: (1) had an on-site generation system interconnected with the
Company’s system on December 20, 2019, or (2) had made binding financial commitments to
install an on-site generation system as of December 20, 2019, and proceeded to install and
interconnect the system within one year, the previously installed or newly installed on-site
DECISION MEMORANDUM 3
generation system would be governed by the net-metering terms and rules in place when such
system was designed and/or installed. Order No. 34509 at 10, 14-15; see also Order No. 34546 at
8-9 (clarifying certain issues relating to grandfathering including that it is the system that receives
and maintains grandfather status not the customer, and that a customer can expand their system
without losing grandfathered status for the entire system if the expansion is metered separately).
IDAPA Rule 31.01.01.054.03 provides that “[f]ormal complaints must . . . [r]efer to the
specific provision of statute, rule, order, notice, tariff or other controlling law that the utility or
person has violated.” IDAPA Rule 31.01.01.065 provides that insufficient or defective filings may
be dismissed.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Commission issue a Summons requiring the Company to answer
the Complaint within 21 days of issuance of the Summons and allow Staff and the Complainant
14 days to respond to the Company’s response.
COMMISSION DECISION
Does the Commission wish to:
1. Issue a Summons requiring the Company to answer the Complaint within 21 days of
issuance of the Summons and allow Staff and the Complainant 14 days to respond to the
Company’s response?
2. Does the Commission wish to dismiss the Complaint under IDAPA Rule 31.01.01.054.03,
without prejudice, for failing to cite any statute, rule, order, notice, tariff, or controlling
law the Company has violated?
3. Anything else?

______________________
Riley Newton
Deputy Attorney General

I:\Legal\ELECTRIC\IPC-E-23-06 Cashmore\IPCE2134_memo_rn.docx