20230328Comments (3)_3.pdf

From: PUCWeb No�fica�on <[e-mail]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2023 7:00 AM
To: Jan Noriyuki <[e-mail]>
Subject: No�ce: A comment was submited to PUCWeb

The following comment was submited via PUCWeb:

Name: Jeffrey Klingler
Submission Time: Mar 27 2023 6:55PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 2558 Bungalow Dr
Idaho Falls, ID 83401

Name of U�lity Company: RMP

Case ID: PAC-E-22-15

Comment: "One of the reasons RMP gave for ge�ng rid of Net metering in favor of net billing is because
solar customers did not cover enough of the fixed costs. With these new rates it penalizes solar/wind
genera�ng customers again and does nothing to leverage any on-site storage investments that may
exist. I have to produce a lot more credits at a lower rate that go to paying for much higher fixed costs
that my system uses less of than other customers. My excess power goes to my neighbors and doesn’t
push power backwards over transmission lines reduces investment for genera�on as well. Net metering
should be reinstated for all past and new solar installs with these modernized rates and remove the 10%
installed genera�on expansion limit that would force net metering customers to switch to net billing.
The new rates don’t encourage energy conserva�on with the move away from �ered rates. Net
metering/Net Billing customers with on-site storage should be allowed to convert to �me of day rates. I
have 28kWh of Powerwall storage where I can easily shi� my usage around the new peak periods, use
my solar to reduce usage when sun is shinning and pump any excess power into my Powerwalls or my
EV’s when plugged in during sunny days using Tesla’s new so�ware update for my Powerwalls. I would
not need to push power out to the grid. Why should RMP be able to resell power produc�on at a profit
via net billing when they didn’t make the investment and don’t want to encourage it? RMP should also
pay generators in cash instead of credits."

------
[Open in the PUC Intranet applica�on]

------------------------------------------------------

From: PUCWeb No�fica�on <[e-mail]>
Sent: Sunday, March 26, 2023 10:00 AM
To: ConsumerComplaintsWeb <[e-mail]>
Subject: No�ce: A complaint was submited to PUCWeb

The following complaint was submited via PUCWeb:

Name: Brian Kajganich
Submission Time: Mar 26 2023 9:28AM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 4375 N Bristol Dr
Idaho Falls, ID 83401-1373

Name of U�lity Company: Rocky Mountain Power

Contacted U�lity: Yes

Comment: "This is in regards to Rocky Mountain Power mo�on to modernize rates... Jacking up monthly
service charges to a level higher than / equal to that of customer's monthly power bill is WRONG,
dishonest and a complete SCAM!!! *Going from an $8 service charge per month to $29.95 per month =
374% INCREASE!!! A $21.95 per month increase is complete FRAUD!! THEY are PENALIZING "excellent"
customers who do not contribute to gross energy demand on the power grid!!! My monthly bill is ~$29
to $40 ($34.69 for March) for energy usage each month throughout the year... & yes, that is year round.
I periodically receive emails from RMP praising AND thanking me for my very LOW energy consump�on.
They state my usage is FAR BELOW (up in the 90+ percen�le) that of other Rocky Mountain customers!!
So how am I to be thanked... charged a MONTHLY SERVICE FEE that costs the SAME or MORE than my
actual energy charge / usage!!??? How the hell does that make sense? Charge customers who use &
grossly draw power from the grid accordingly - the more you use... the higher your energy fee & service
charge will be. If the Idaho Public U�li�es Commission passes this ridiculous & scandalous mo�on... you
are just as CROOKED & it shows just what a complete monopoly & SCAM Idahoans are facing. Please do
not let them get away with this ridiculous mo�on."

* I cannot imagine how this astronomical increase would affect other less than fortunate
Idahoans...
especially ones that already cannot afford current ever rising costs; let alone being able to
provide for & feed their families.
Sincerely,
Brian W. Kajganich

------
[Open in the PUC Intranet applica�on]

----------------------------------------------

From: PUCWeb No�fica�on <[e-mail]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2023 3:00 PM
To: Jan Noriyuki <[e-mail]>
Subject: No�ce: A comment was submited to PUCWeb

The following comment was submited via PUCWeb:

Name: Diane Gempler
Submission Time: Mar 28 2023 2:00PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 363 1st East PO Box 324
Ririe, ID 83443

Name of U�lity Company: Rocky Mountain Power

Case ID: PAC-E-22-15

Comment: "Proposed Base Rate Increases currently being considered will effec�vely double my monthly
electricity cost within the next five years. There is no doubt that my fixed income will not be doubled in
the same �me period. Every effort has been made to minimize my u�lity usage to mi�gate past
increases. By doubling the base rate, users such as myself are being hit extremely hard with no means of
conserving to off-set the increased rate."

------
[Open in the PUC Intranet applica�on]